A Nova Scotia judge has denied William Sandeson’s bail application, as Sandeson awaits his court date next year to appeal his murder conviction.
Sandeson was found guilty of second-degree murder in February. During the trial, he had claimed he killed Taylor Samson, 22, in self-defence during a cannabis deal on the evening of Aug. 15, 2015.
The Crown had argued that Sandeson, who was 23 at the time and about to begin studying medicine at Dalhousie University, was buried in debt and planned to kill Samson that night to steal the 20 pounds of cannabis he had previously arranged to buy for $40,000.
In the end, the 12 jurors found Sandeson guilty of second-degree murder.
It was Sandeson’s second trial for Samson’s murder. He was initially found guilty of first-degree murder after his first trial in 2017, but the conviction was overturned in June 2020 after the Court of Appeal found that a mistrial should have been granted.
Sandeson is eligible for parole in 2030.
In May, Sandeson applied to appeal his second conviction. That appeal is scheduled to be heard on June 13, 2024, and Sandeson applied to be be released on bail until that date.
In a decision released Oct. 30, Justice J.A. Farrar dismissed Sandeson’s proposal for bail, saying “Mr. Sandeson failed to persuade me that he should be released.”
“Mr. Sandeson proposed being released on bail with five sureties—his mother and father and three brothers—and to be fitted with a GPS ankle bracelet,” Farrar’s decision outlined.
“He proposed to live with his parents at the family farm in Truro and to have one of his sureties be with him at all times. He also proposes to provide police with access to the video cameras installed at the family home and to ensure the constant operation of the cameras.”
Farrar said a successful appeal would be based on three criteria: that the appeal is not frivolous, that Sandeson would surrender himself into custody in advance of the appeal, and that his detention was not necessary in the public interest.
While Farrar was “satisfied” Sandeson would surrender himself into custody, the issue of “public interest” was problematic.
“Mr. Sandeson’s application fails on the public interest criterion. His grounds of appeal, which I consider to be weak, are also relevant to consideration of the public interest,” Farrar wrote.
Farrar went on to say that the evidence for conviction of second-degree murder was “strong.”
“Mr. Sandeson has admitted to shooting Mr. Samson, and his plea of self-defence was not successful. The only logical conclusion is the jury found he intended to kill Mr. Samson,” read the decision.
“The grounds of appeal appear to be weak. This is one of those circumstances where the public interest in enforceability is very high and outweighs the reviewability interest.”
— with files from Global News’ Alex Cooke
Comments