Two Hamilton Crown prosecutors committed serious errors during a murder trial, leading a Superior Court judge to issue a rare judicial stay, halting all proceedings and releasing the accused from one of Canada’s most severe criminal charges. Salomon Bashir faced trial for the second-degree murder of Everton Frost, 23, when Justice Giulia Gambacorta granted the stay despite objections from the Crown. The judge criticized assistant Crown attorneys Michael Dean and Steve Kim, as well as Hamilton police, for their lackadaisical approach and negligence that threatened Bashir’s right to a fair trial.
Gambacorta highlighted two significant blunders by Dean and Kim, including their failure to disclose vital DNA and cellphone tower evidence to the defense before the trial, depriving Bashir’s lawyers of adequate preparation time. The judge emphasized that such repeated indifference violated principles of fairness and undermined the judicial process, amounting to an abuse of process. She deemed the Crown’s behavior warranting a judicial stay, a remedy reserved for the most blatant cases.
Regarding the DNA evidence, Bashir was arrested by Hamilton police in 2023 for the shooting death of Frost. Critical DNA evidence linking Frost’s brother to a mask found at the crime scene was not promptly disclosed to the Crown or the defense, causing a delay in its presentation during the trial. Additionally, the Crown failed to inform the defense about the use of cellphone tower data and expert witnesses until the eve of the trial, further complicating the proceedings.
Despite the Crown’s request for a mistrial and a new trial, Gambacorta ruled in favor of the judicial stay due to the Crown’s conduct meeting the required threshold. The defense lawyers, Laura Giordano and Ian McCuaig, expressed concern over the lack of interest displayed by the Crown’s office in addressing the case’s mishandling, emphasizing the importance of upholding fair trial rights. They noted that Bashir, who maintained his innocence, was denied the opportunity for a fair trial, underscoring the necessity of the judge’s decision to maintain public confidence in the judicial system and safeguard individuals’ rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
