Jurors in a Cayuga, Ont., courtroom heard Tuesday from a Crown prosecutor that Randall McKenzie and Brandi Stewart-Sperry collaborated to ambush and kill Ontario Provincial Police Const. Greg Pierzchala in December 2022.
In his closing statement on Wednesday, Stewart-Sperry’s lawyer, Scott Reid, said believing the Crown’s narrative beyond a reasonable doubt requires “tunnel vision.”
Reid told the Superior Court trial his client made bad choices, but those don’t make her a murderer or a killer, and added that the shooter “used Brandi as a shield, unwittingly.”
“This is a case about Randall, not Brandi. She’s just along for the ride.”
McKenzie and Stewart-Sperry are charged with first-degree murder in the shooting death of Pierzchala, 28. Both have pleaded not guilty. The trial began March 27.
Stewart-Sperry has admitted to being present during the shooting — which was captured by Pierzchala’s bodycam. McKenzie does not.
The Crown alleges the three came into contact when the co-accused stole a car from Hamilton and crashed it in a ditch near Hagersville. After trying to get help from passersby to leave the scene, McKenzie and Stewart-Sperry, who were boyfriend and girlfriend, had two choices when a police officer arrived, Crown lawyer Fraser McCracken said Tuesday. They could surrender or “eliminate the threat.”
Stewart-Sperry attempted to distract Pierzchala and hide McKenzie from view while he readied a handgun inside the pocket of his hoodie and fatally shot the officer, McCracken said.
On Tuesday, McKenzie’s lawyer, Douglas Holt, argued there’s reasonable doubt as to whether McKenzie was the shooter captured on video.
‘Nothing more than speculation and conjecture’
Reid said the shooter, no matter who it was, is a “coward” who “cut down a brave young officer” in the prime of his life.
Stewart-Sperry fled the scene of the crime with that shooter in another stolen vehicle, Reid said, but the choices she made later were more understandable than the Crown prosecutor has suggested.
In fact, Reid argued, evidence against Stewart-Sperry is “nothing more than speculation and conjecture.”
Over the course of a couple hours, Reid contradicted multiple parts of the Crown’s case.
McCracken said Tuesday that Stewart-Sperry was likely intoxicated during the shooting, but by fleeing and attempting to hide and repair their stolen getaway vehicle, she showed she knew what she was doing.
On Wednesday, Reid countered she was not in her right mind, noting that witnesses who saw her prior to the shooting described her using terms such as “high as a kite” and recounted her acting irrationally.
Reid also presented an alternate take on the bodycam video in which the shooter is seen opening fire on Pierzchala while Stewart-Sperry stands next to the gunman.
McCracken said the video shows Stewart-Sperry providing cover for the shooter, but Reid said it looks as if the gunman is readying to fire before his client reacts. He said she appeared to react to the shooting more slowly than the witness captured on video because she was intoxicated.
Actions after shooting not indicative of guilt: defence
As for why his client fled the scene, Reid asked the jurors to put themselves in her shoes and avoid making assumptions about how someone should act during a traumatic situation.
“I hope and pray none of you find yourselves in the situation Brandi was in that day,” he said, as Stewart-Sperry sat crying.
Reid said Stewart-Sperry might have fled with a man who had just shot down a police officer because she was afraid of being left alone, panicked and confused, in love or maybe afraid he might hurt her or her family if she didn’t go along with him.
He added there is no evidence Stewart-Sperry knew McKenzie had texted people about “shooting out with the cops,” as the jury has heard, and said texts between McKenzie and her mother indicate the co-accused were apart for about two weeks in December. Reid said it’s reasonable to think the two may not have known each other all that well and she might not have known he had a gun.
Jury deliberations set to begin Thursday
After Reid’s closing, Superior Court Justice Andrew Goodman began instructing the jury on the legal issues they will need to consider during their deliberations.
He is scheduled to continue his charge to the jury on Thursday morning, and then deliberations will begin.
