The judge presiding over the trial of a man accused of fatally running over a Toronto police officer expressed concerns about the prosecution’s changing theory of the events that night. At one point, she questioned whether a guilty verdict for murder could be reached based on the evidence presented in court.
During legal arguments not heard by the jury, Ontario Superior Court Justice Anne Molloy repeatedly asked the Crown to clarify its narrative of how Umar Zameer hit Det.-Const. Jeffrey Northrup with his car on July 2, 2021.
Prosecutors Michael Cantlon and Karen Simone introduced new theories about where and how Northrup was struck after all evidence had been presented to the jury, some of which were not discussed during their expert’s testimony.
One theory, claiming Northrup was “clearly visible” to Zameer when he was hit, was abandoned after Molloy expressed difficulty understanding it.
The Crown’s position “keeps morphing,” remarked the judge during discussions on her instructions to the jury.
She questioned the timing of introducing new theories after the evidence was closed and the experts had finished their testimonies.
These arguments and evidence discussed in the absence of the jury cannot be disclosed until the jury deliberations begin.
Prosecution Allegations Against Zameer
Zameer has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in Northrup’s death. The case focuses on whether Zameer intended to hit Northrup or knew it happened, as well as his awareness of the approaching police officers.
The defence argues that Northrup’s death was an accident, as Zameer did not know the approaching individuals were police officers and feared for his family’s safety.
Prosecutors allege Zameer intentionally drove recklessly towards Northrup, causing his death. Witness testimony and expert opinions have presented conflicting accounts of the events that unfolded.
Crash reconstruction experts presented differing opinions on how the incident occurred, further complicating the case.
Security footage and expert testimonies raised questions about the sequence of events leading to Northrup’s death, adding complexity to the trial.
Judge’s Assessment of Discrepancies
After reviewing the evidence, Molloy highlighted the discrepancies between witness accounts and expert opinions, questioning the prosecution’s murder allegations.
She expressed doubts about the feasibility of reaching a murder conviction based on the evidence presented in court.
The judge pointed out the absence of evidence supporting the Crown’s murder theory, emphasizing the need for consistency in the prosecution’s arguments.
