Two teens found guilty of manslaughter in stabbing death of Ali Mohummad
Two young men are guilty of manslaughter because they organized and participated in an ambush in a Hamilton Mountain parking lot nearly two years ago that led to the death of Ali Mohummad, an Ontario Court Justice ruled Thursday.
It's not clear who wielded the knife that killed the 19-year-old, nor is it clear who stabbed his brother, Hamza Chaudry, or who hurt two other friends during the chaotic confrontation at 310 Limeridge Rd. W. But that doesn't matter, the two young men, both now 19, are nevertheless responsible because it was a group assault, ruled Justice Bernd Zabel.
He found the pair were part of a group in pursuit of a common goal to assault others. The fact that their group was armed, in particular, shows the risk that someone could be seriously hurt or killed was foreseeable.
A blow of one is a blow of all," Zabel said, agreeing with the Crown's submissions.
They were found not guilty of second-degree murder, but guilty of the lesser included offence of manslaughter. They were also convicted of two counts of aggravated assault and one of assault with a weapon for injuries suffered by Chaudry and two friends during the parking lot ambush early on the morning of July 19, 2020.
They were 17 at the time and cannot be named under the Youth Criminal Justice Act. However, assistant Crown attorney Alannah Grady said the prosecution will be seeking to have the pair sentenced as adults. A youth conviction for manslaughter has a maximum sentence of three years. An adult sentence has a maximum of life in prison, court heard.
The courtroom was packed Thursday with family for both convicted teens, Mohummad's family and police. Everyone was silent as Zabel announced his verdict.
One of the teens learned his fate sitting in the prisoner's docket. He was previously out on bail but was recently arrested on unrelated charges. The other teen had been out on bail under strict house arrest since shortly after the homicide. However, after the convictions, Zabel agreed with the Crown and revoked bail for both.
Zabel found the guilty pair were angry about a perceived disrespect at a birthday party earlier that summer, where Chaudry and a few friends in their 20s sat separately from the teenaged partygoers. Court heard one of the convicted men confronted Chaudry about it and asked whether he was being asked to leave. After this confrontation there was continued obsession and aggression" toward Chaudry that culminated in the meetup in the Limeridge Road West parking lot.
Zabel found all witnesses credible, including Chaudry and his friends. Chaudry told the court he was just going there to talk out the issue and the friends were there as support. When they pulled into the parking lot in several vehicles, a large group armed with knives, rocks, steel pipes and other weapons immediately set upon them, first targeting Chaudry's distinct blue Mustang.
He was hit through a window, his door opened and then he was stabbed in the arm. Several other friends were assaulted during the melee. Chaudry's group never displayed aggression or violence, did not consent to a fight and then acted appropriately to defend themselves, Zabel said.
The 15-day trial heard from 22 witnesses and saw 46 exhibits, including crucial video of the brawl taken from the balcony of a nearby apartment building. It shows the last moments of Mohummad's life as he was chased out of the parking lot. The two convicted teens were hit by a car during the melee.
Zabel agreed with the Crown and found Mohummad had been stabbed in the parking lot and then ran, collapsing down an embankment by an apartment building behind the parking lot. Court heard he was missing after the ambush, but his stabbed body was found about five hours later.
Defence attorneys for both teens had argued the young men thought they were going to a consensual fight and they had no idea what happened to Mohummad. However, Zabel rejected their defence, instead agreeing with the Crown on nearly every point.
Defence lawyer Jaime Stephenson argued that her client had been out on bail, under strict conditions, without issue since late July 2020. Due to restrictions since the pandemic, it is still difficult for lawyers to access their clients on the phone or in person while in custody, making it difficult to prepare for sentencing, she said. Revoking bail before sentencing should be the exception, not the norm.
Zabel disagreed and found revoking bail was necessary to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice."
Minutes later, as family looked on, Stephenson's client took off a necklace and emptied his pockets before being led away into custody.
Supporters for the other teen - who was already in custody - blew kisses and made heart shapes with their hands as he was led away.
Some family quietly wiped their eyes or shook their heads. Outside the courtroom, emotions spilled over with some words exchanged in the crowded hallway.
The court is ordering a pre-sentence report and a more detailed psychological and medical assessment for both young men in advance of sentencing. The case returns next week to set a date. Sentencing submissions are not anticipated until at least September.
Meanwhile, another teen, who was also 17 at the time of the homicide, is being tried separately. He sought an application to have his charges stayed because of court delays, but was denied Wednesday. His trial is set to begin Jan. 3, 2023.
Nicole O'Reilly is a crime and justice reporter at The Spectator. noreilly@thespec.com