Lawyer argues self-defence in Hamilton manslaughter trial

On the afternoon more than two years ago when a 17-year-old Hamilton boy was fatally stabbed inside a car where he and his friends were trying to rob their drug dealer, Dawson Farr acted in self-defence, argued his defence attorney.

It was a matter of panic, it was a matter of fear," Farr's lawyer, Jeffrey Manishen, said during closing submissions in the manslaughter trial Monday.

He argued that fear was reasonable because Farr and his friend, Tae Yoon (Dan) Park, were being threatened with a gun and an extendable baton. That gun turned out to be a BB gun painted black to look real.

The victim cannot be named because of a publication ban.

Farr was 18 on Dec. 7, 2018 when he agreed to meet the 17-year-old and his friend, Jacob Vogl, near Bruleville Park to sell 14 grams of cocaine - the biggest sale he'd ever made. The trial heard from multiple witnesses that the victim, Vogl and their friend, Ayden Murphy, planned to rob Farr, thinking him an easy target. But the robbery didn't go as planned; Farr unexpectedly brought Park with him.

Both Farr and Park, who is also charged, but being tried separately, said the teens pinned them in the back seat of the car with their seats and pointed a gun at them. Park grabbed at the gun. Farr testified that he reached into his bag to pull out his knife, and when he looked up, the 17-year-old victim was holding up a baton. Farr said he feared the baton would be used on Park, who could lose control of the gun.

I assumed we'd get shot," Farr testified.

He told court he doesn't remember the actual stabbing, but the next thing he remembers was his knife in the teen's chest.

On Monday, Manishen said it's possible Farr stabbed the teen, but also noted it's possible in the struggle inside the car that the victim moved toward the knife, or a combination of both.

A forensic pathologist testified that while there was a single entry site, there were two internal wound tracks from the knife, one piercing the victim's aorta. Manishen argued that this meant the two stabbings happened in quick succession.

Manishen argued that Vogl and Murphy were not credible witnesses, pointing to multiple inconsistencies in their testimony, admitted lies they told police and their attempts to minimize their own actions that day. When Vogl testified, he admitted they brought the BB gun but said it was never drawn. This contradicts evidence from Farr and Park, who Manishen argued were more credible.

At the start of the trail, the Crown said that even if the court finds Farr acted in self-defence, he is still guilty of unlawful act homicide because the stabbing happened in the midst of a criminal act - drug trafficking - where harm was foreseeable.

But Manishen said the stabbing did not happen because of the drug trafficking, but because of the robbery. Before the stabbing, Farr had sold cocaine to the victim and Vogl for several months and had no reason to suspect trouble. He testified that he only sold to people he knew or who had been introduced by someone he knew. Farr said he always carried his knife because Hamilton is a dangerous city, not specifically for drug sales.

The victim, Vogl and Murphy planned the robbery, made the decision to bring weapons, and confined Farr and Park in the car, Manishen said.

It's their actions that started it and that were a significant contributing factor," he said.

The judge-alone trial continues Tuesday with closing submissions by the Crown.

Nicole O'Reilly is a Hamilton-based reporter covering crime and justice for The Spectator. Reach her via email: noreilly@thespec.com