Lawyers make final arguments in Behchokǫ̀ murder trial

Crown and defence lawyers have presented their theories on the 2023 death of 17-year-old Deijean Drybones to a jury in NWT Supreme Court.

During his closing statement in the trial of Zakk Lafferty in a Yellowknife courtroom on Wednesday afternoon, prosecutor Brendan Green urged 12 jurors to find Lafferty, 26, guilty of second-degree murder in Deijean’s death.

Green pointed to a statement Deijean had given to a police officer on the morning of August 4, 2023, saying Lafferty had stabbed him.

When asked why, Deijean told the officer: “My friend beat him up and he thought I did it.”

In her closing statement, defence lawyer Kim Arial argued the Crown had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that her client stabbed Deijean.

She said the jury should instead accept Lafferty’s statement to police that he had left the home where Deijean was stabbed before the crime occurred and did not return.

What happened in August 2023?

While they disagree on exactly what may have happened, there are several details of the circumstances surrounding Deijean’s death on which the lawyers do agree.

On the evening of August 3, 2023 and into the early hours of the following morning, Deijean and four other people were drinking at a home in Behchokǫ̀.

Lafferty arrived at the home with a bottle of high-potency vodka and also began drinking. Some time later he was involved in a fight where he sustained an injury to his right eye.

The four other people in the home testified during the trial that they were intoxicated and had difficulty recalling what happened. None said they remember seeing Deijean being stabbed.

Early on August 4, 2023, police responded to a call at the home where they found Deijean seriously injured. That is where Deijean made the statement to police that he had been stabbed by Lafferty.

Deijean was taken to the local health centre and then Stanton Territorial Hospital in Yellowknife, where he was declared deceased shortly before 6am.

He died of a single stab wound to the chest.

RCMP arrested Lafferty shortly after he arrived at the Behchokǫ̀ health centre for treatment of his injuries, at 11am.

During a search on August 5, police did not find a murder weapon but did locate Lafferty’s cell phone inside the home where Deijean was stabbed and an empty bottle of high-potency vodka in the bushes outside.

Two swabs of blood taken from the home matched Deijean’s DNA, while swabs taken from Lafferty’s hands and T-shirt did not.

Police searched Lafferty’s home on August 9 and did not recover any evidence.

Where lawyers disagree

A key issue where the lawyers’ theories diverge is whether Lafferty returned to the house where the party was taking place after Lafferty was injured in a fight.

Green argued Lafferty had gone back to the house, angry about being injured and looking for his phone, and – taking his anger out on “the last man standing at the party” – stabbed Deijean.

Green referenced the testimony of a witness who spoke to Deijean on the phone early on August 4, 2023. She said near the end of a call, around 2:29 am, she heard a door open and someone ask “where the fuck is my phone?” The witness said she then heard Deijean respond “I don’t got it,” followed by a punching sound, Deijean screaming and the other person saying “go cry about it.”

Green argued Lafferty was the other person whom the witness heard speaking and the punching sound was Lafferty stabbing Deijean.

Arial, by contrast, said jurors should accept Lafferty’s statement to police in which he said he left the house after the fight, went home and did not leave his home until he went to the health centre later that morning.

While Green said inconsistencies in Lafferty’s statement undermined his credibility, Arial said it’s not unusual that Lafferty would not remember all the details precisely, as he had been drinking. She added that despite being challenged, Lafferty never wavered in saying he did not return to the house.

Arial also pointed to surveillance footage taken from a house located in between Lafferty’s home and the home where the party was located. She argued the video showed Lafferty wearing a white shirt and walking away from the house where the party was, toward his home, at 1:44am.

Arial argued a person that subsequently appeared to be wearing a dark top and walking toward the house party at 2:26am, and back again at 2:30am, was a different person and not Lafferty. She said officers had not recovered a dark sweater or jacket during their searches and Lafferty was arrested wearing a white T-shirt he had been wearing the previous evening.

Green cautioned the jury to “be very careful” with the video evidence, describing it as “a grainy image of a shadowy figure.” He noted the footage is not clear enough to tell exactly who is pictured, if the same person or two different people were shown walking, and where the person or people had come from or ended up.

Green added that police had not inventoried all of the clothing in Lafferty’s home during their search.

Deijean’s statement

A crucial part of the Crown’s case is the statement Deijean made to police about who had stabbed him.

Green said the statement was reliable and credible.

“Sometimes the answer is in the first place you look,” he said.

While Deijean had been drinking, Green argued he “understood the gravity of the situation” and, on an audio recording of the statement, did not sound like someone who was confused or whose mind was clouded by alcohol. Green added that Deijean had been in the best position to see who had stabbed him.

Arial questioned the reliability of Deijean’s statement, saying intoxication can impact how people perceive events and lead to confusion. As Deijean has since died, she added, he cannot now answer questions about what he told police.

Justice David Gates is expected to give the jury instructions on Thursday at noon. The 12 jurors will then be tasked with deciding whether Lafferty is guilty of second-degree murder, manslaughter or neither charge.