After six days of deliberations, a jury found Christopher Husbands (“Husbands”) guilty of two counts of manslaughter for killing Nixon Nirmalendran (“Nirmalendran”) and Ahmed Hassan (“Hassan”) during a shooting spree at the Eaton Centre in downtown Toronto on June 2, 2012.
Husbands was also convicted of five counts of aggravated assault, one count of criminal negligence causing bodily harm, and one count of reckless discharge of a firearm for injuring bystanders in the crowded food court.
In April 2015, Husbands was sentenced to life imprisonment with no chance of parole for 30 years when he was convicted of two counts of second-degree murder. He launched an appeal and was granted a second trial after the Ontario Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had erred during jury selection.
On June 2, 2012, Husbands was shopping at the Eaton Centre with his girlfriend. They proceeded to the food court after purchasing inline skates and a jacket from Sport Chek.
Husbands began shooting in the food court of the Eaton Centre in the direction of a group of five men, which included the deceased Nirmalendran and his brother Nisan Nirmalendran. Husbands testified at trial that these brothers were part of a group of men that beat and stabbed him more than 20 times three months prior to this incident.
Husbands fired 14 shots during his rampage as seen on surveillance video from the food court. Bullets from Husbands’ gun killed Nirmalendran and Hassan. He also shot, but did not kill, 13-year-old, Connor Stevenson, in the head. Two additional shoppers were shot in the leg and two were grazed by bullets. Husbands actions also caused a stampede of panicked shoppers who trampled a pregnant woman.
WHAT WAS HUSBANDS’ DEFENCE ARGUMENT?
Husbands’ defence team argued that at the time of the shooting their client was in a dissociative state as a result of suffering from PTSD and did not have control over his actions. It was argued that Husbands had been triggered after seeing the Nirmalendran brothers at the Eaton Centre.
Husbands’ defence lawyers infer that the jury either believed that Husbands was provoked into shooting at men who had previously attacked him, or that his PTSD “caused him to react instinctively without forming the intent to kill”.
Stephanie DiGiuseppe, one of Husbands’ lawyers, stated:
It would have been easy for the jury to look at the video and think this was all about revenge, but to look at it through the lens of trauma was something significant, I think, for our community.
WHAT WAS THE CROWN’S ARGUMENT?
Crown prosecutors argued that Husbands was out for revenge and went on a shooting rampage as a form of “street justice”.
Although the Crown accepted that Husbands had PTSD, it was argued that Husbands was in control of his actions throughout the confrontation.
The psychiatric experts who assessed Husbands all agreed that he had PTSD, but were split on whether he was in a dissociative state at the time of his shooting rampage.
At the time of the shooting rampage, Husbands was out on bail for a sexual assault conviction. He was supposed to be living under house arrest and he was under a weapons ban as well by court order. The jury was not privy to this information.
WHAT IS MANSLAUGHTER?
Manslaughter is defined as a homicide which is committed without the intention to cause death, although there may have been an intention to cause harm.
Manslaughter does not carry a minimum sentence, except when it is committed with a firearm. In the case of a conviction of manslaughter committed with a firearm, there is a minimum sentence of four years in prison.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT FOR HUSBANDS?
Husbands is facing a life sentence in prison with no chance of parole for seven years.
Parole refers to the temporary release of a prisoner who agrees to abide by the conditions set by the court before the completion of the maximum sentence. However, the ability to apply for parole does not necessarily mean that parole will be granted.
Husbands’ sentencing hearing will begin on April 29, 2019. He has already been behind bars for seven years.
We will continue to follow this case and will report on any developments in this blog.
In the meantime, if you have any questions regarding charges laid against you or your legal rights, please contact the knowledgeable criminal lawyers at Affleck & Barrison LLP online or at 905-404-1947. Our skilled criminal lawyers have significant experience defending a wide range of criminal charges and protecting our client’s rights. For your convenience, we offer a 24-hour telephone service to protect your rights and to ensure that you have access to justice.