Credibility of Witnesses Central to Closing Arguments in Desjarlais-Kelly Murder Trial
The credibility of two key witnesses took center stage during Thursday's closing arguments at the second-degree murder trial of Katlim Kristian John Desjarlais-Kelly. As the Saskatoon jury prepares to begin deliberations, conflicting accounts from the victim's longtime partner and the accused himself have created a stark contrast in narratives about the fatal shooting of 48-year-old Arden Panipekeesick.
Conflicting Accounts of a Fatal Night
Desjarlais-Kelly, 23, stands accused of fatally shooting Panipekeesick in the neck at a residence on Avenue K North on February 10, 2024. The trial, which commenced on January 26 at Saskatoon Court of King's Bench, has presented jurors with dramatically different versions of what transpired that evening.
Eva Pritchard, Panipekeesick's partner of many years, testified that both the victim and the accused drew firearms and exchanged shots following an argument. According to her account, the confrontation began when Panipekeesick instructed Desjarlais-Kelly to vacate the premises. Pritchard stated that after initially leaving, Desjarlais-Kelly returned to the home and fired the lethal shot.
Defence Challenges Witness Reliability
Defence lawyer Patrick McDougall urged jurors to approach Pritchard's testimony with significant skepticism during his closing arguments. He presented his client's version of events as more credible, wherein Desjarlais-Kelly claimed Panipekeesick emerged from the basement brandishing two firearms and discharged shots first.
Desjarlais-Kelly testified that he only retrieved his weapon after being shot by Panipekeesick, firing a single round as he collapsed. McDougall highlighted forensic evidence placing his client's blood at the shooting scene, suggesting Desjarlais-Kelly acted out of fear of being shot again.
"He was afraid of being shot again," McDougall emphasized, noting that a forensic pathologist's determination that the bullet struck an object before hitting the victim supports the defense's claim that it "wasn't a targeted shot." The defense attorney argued the prosecution failed to establish Desjarlais-Kelly possessed the requisite intent to kill when he fired his weapon.
Prosecution Urges Jury to Trust Victim's Partner
Crown prosecutor Lee Hnatiuk presented a contrasting perspective, urging jurors to accept Pritchard's account as truthful. He contended Desjarlais-Kelly was not in imminent danger when he re-entered the home after being told to leave, stating unequivocally, "He was not acting in self-defence."
Hnatiuk pointed out that Pritchard had no prior relationship with the accused and therefore lacked motive to fabricate testimony against him. He noted several details in her account aligned with Desjarlais-Kelly's version, including the specific location from which the accused drew his firearm.
Additionally, Pritchard testified that Panipekeesick was moving toward the basement stairs when shot, a detail Hnatiuk said corresponds with where the victim's body was discovered. The prosecutor argued the consistency of these details demonstrates Pritchard's presence during the incident, directly contradicting Desjarlais-Kelly's assertion that she was absent from the living room.
"(Pritchard) had to have been present when those incidents occurred, there are too many details that line up," Hnatiuk asserted during his closing statement.
With closing arguments concluded, the case now rests with the jury, who must weigh these conflicting testimonies and determine whether the prosecution has proven Desjarlais-Kelly's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for the second-degree murder of Arden Panipekeesick.
