Crown prosecutors argued the totality of evidence against Mark Grant in his retrial for Candace Derksen’s murder, clearly points to him being the killer.
Grant was found guilty of second-degree murder in his first trial for Derksen’s death in 2011 but appealed the verdict and was granted a new trial.
His retrial started in January and closing arguments are wrapping up Friday.
RELATED: Derksen trial continues exactly 32 years after teen’s body found in Winnipeg
Derksen went missing while walking home from school on Nov. 30, 1984. Her body was found in a storage shed near an Elmwood six weeks later.
On Friday, prosecutor Brent Davidson refuted the scathing attack Grant’s defense lawyer, Saul Simmonds launched during his closing arguments, saying much of what was said wasn’t based on evidence.
Simmonds aggressively challenged the validity of DNA evidence that the prosecution relied on to connect Grant to twine found at the crime scene that was used to tie-up Derksen.
RELATED: Candace Derksen murder retrial: defence lawyer discredits DNA evidence in closing arguments
Davidson acknowledged there were some issues with the DNA testing but argued those issues don’t create reasonable doubt.
He said the rest of the evidence still overwhelmingly points to Grant as the killer. He said despite the problems with the DNA testing, the results exclude over 99 per cent of the population — but not Grant.
- What is a halal mortgage? How interest-free home financing works in Canada
- Capital gains changes are ‘really fair,’ Freeland says, as doctors cry foul
- Budget 2024 failed to spark ‘political reboot’ for Liberals, polling suggests
- Peel police chief met Sri Lankan officer a court says ‘participated’ in torture
Davidson said Grant had the means and opportunity to commit the murder and that he was lying during a recorded interview with police in which he denied knowing Derksen or killing her.
Grant “should not be believed,” Davidson said.
He also threw cold water on Simmonds’ second suspect theory, suggesting the judge give it “no weight” in her decision.
READ MORE: Alternate suspect theory highlights first week of Candace Derksen case
A 12-year-old girl reported she was abducted by a man, tied up and put in a boxcar near the Derksen crime scene after Derksen’s body was found in 1985.
But Davidson said there were too many inconsistencies in the victim’s story to be reliable and the abduction were markedly different because Derksen wasn’t given a chance to escape.
The second suspect theory wasn’t heard by the jury in the first trial and was a key reason why the retrial was ordered.
WATCH: Derksen family speaks about a new trial in daughter’s killing
Davidson also stressed the importance of testimony from a woman who clams Grant said to her, “I’ll do to you what I did to Candace.”
However, Grant’s lawyer argued she isn’t credible and that nothing corroborates her testimony.
Davidson said the case against Grant comes down to three main points: science, means and opportunity and an admission.
“Mark Grant is guilty of murdering Candace Derksen,” is how Davidson closed his argument.
Comments