Nunavik woman could have died by suicide, defence argues

Lawyers begin final arguments in Kwasi Benjamin’s second-degree murder trial

By COURTNEY EDGAR

In the Montreal murder trial of Kwasi Benjamin, Crown prosecutor Dennis Galiatsatos has presented evidence suggesting Nellie Angutiguluk died at the hands of another person, likely Benjamin. But defence lawyer Paul Skolnik argues she likely died by suicide. (SPVM PHOTO)


In the Montreal murder trial of Kwasi Benjamin, Crown prosecutor Dennis Galiatsatos has presented evidence suggesting Nellie Angutiguluk died at the hands of another person, likely Benjamin. But defence lawyer Paul Skolnik argues she likely died by suicide. (SPVM PHOTO)

Special to Nunatsiaq News

MONTREAL—As the trial of Kwasi Benjamin continued in Montreal this week, defence lawyer Paul Skolnik said his closing arguments on Tuesday, Feb. 20 that Nellie Angutiguluk, who in May 2015 was found dead in the apartment she shared with Benjamin, died by suicide and not at the hands of her boyfriend.

Benjamin charged with second-degree murder in connection with death of Angutiguluk, a 29-year-old mother of three from Puvirnituq.

The trial, held before Justice Michael Stober and a 12-person jury, started in January, and the last of the defence’s evidence and witnesses were presented last week.

Angutiguluk had moved to Montreal for a better life, but according to her mother’s testimony, she was often sad because she missed her old life and her children.

Throughout the trial, Crown prosecutor Dennis Galiatsatos presented evidence and expert witnesses to suggest the science shows Angutiguluk could have died only of ligature strangulation, likely by another person, and that the prime suspect is Benjamin.

But Skolnik offered a different theory.

“She committed a suicide here and it’s not a murder,” Skolnik told the jury Tuesday morning.

A jury of six women and six men was selected, Skolnik said at the beginning of his arguments, to be representative of society, with a mix of older people and younger people.

“We didn’t want 12 accountants or 12 nurses,” Skolnik said.

He reminded the jury of their oath that race should not play a role in their decision when it comes to considering whether a black man accused of killing an Indigenous woman is guilty or not guilty.

Not one person on the jury, however, presents either as a person of colour or Indigenous.

Skolnik focused on witness accounts of Angutiguluk’s displays of depression, which he said corroborated Benjamin’s version of events—that she was suicidal and took her own life.

And despite the fact that traces of DNA that matched Benjamin’s was found on the front of Angutiguluk’s neck during the autopsy, Skolnik reminded the jury that Benjamin had testified they had cuddled the morning earlier.

“When she was trying to throw herself in front of cars, he grabs her like this,” Skolnik said, gesturing. “Could the DNA have come from that?”

He reminded the jury that Moishe Abenson, a stranger to both Angutiguluk and Benjamin, had called 911 just before 2 a.m. on May 18, 2015, saying that his car almost hit a woman dressed all in white as she walked in the middle of Jean Talon Blvd., near the De Nancy St. apartment where Angutiguluk and Benjamin lived.

Police officers found the couple arguing on the street shortly afterward and escorted them home.

When paramedics were called again, 24 hours later, Angutiguluk was dead, already showing signs of rigor mortis and lividity.

Abenson had testified on Wednesday that the woman in white was nearly getting hit by other cars on that busy street, before he saw a black man step into the street to pull her onto the sidewalk.

“Is it a murder or a suicide?” Skolnik said to the jury.

“If the theory of the prosecution is that Benjamin killed his girlfriend because they were fighting about money and he had a new girlfriend, then why didn’t he let her get hit by the cars in the street?”

Skolnik also argued that some of the witnesses the jury had heard from over the course of the trial should not be believed at all, or only be believed in part.

One is Angutiguluk’s mother—whose emotions, he said, may have caused her to misconstrue what Benjamin told her about how and when he found her daughter.

Maggie Angutiguluk testified that Benjamin had told her he found Nellie on the floor on the morning of May 18, with bubbles at her mouth, still breathing, and put her in bed and went to work.

“She was distraught, in an emotional state,” Skolnik said. “Did she get that right?”

Skolnik said there are some parts of Maggie’s testimony that should be believed.

Maggie had testified that Benjamin was “angry at God” the day after Nellie’s death.

She had testified that Nellie drank a lot. And she had testified that after Nellie’s husband had died, Nellie was very emotional and “was sad most of the time.”

“Why would the accused—if he killed her—go see her mother?” Skolnik asked. “Why would he be so emotional?”

That’s more compatible with innocence than guilt, Skolnik said.

Another witness who he suggested the jury should not rely on was a neighbour who testified that although he had heard many fights between Angutiguluk and Benjamin while living in their apartment building, the fight that took place between 1 a.m. and 3 a.m. on May 18, 2015 was the worst of them all.

A disaster, he had called it, saying he heard crashes, the floor vibrating and the wall shaking.

The neighbour had testified that he heard Angutiguluk shout, “Kill me, kill me, I don’t give a fuck, I’m not afraid to die.”

And he testified that he heard Benjamin reply with, “Shut the fuck up, the neighbours can hear.”

But, Skolnik said, no other neighbours heard this.

“Is there any corroboration?” Skolnik asked the jury. “It could have been glass breaking, beer bottles, furniture knocked over.

But none of the first responders saw any of these signs of a fight.”

Skolnik pointed out a list of discrepancies in the neighbour’s testimonies at the preliminary inquiry and later at the trial.

He reminded the jury that the neighbour had said he fell asleep that night but also said he couldn’t sleep that night.

“Do you believe he did fall asleep or didn’t fall asleep?” Skolnik asked. “Or that he doesn’t know what he is talking about?”

Skolnik reminded the jury that when Sgt.-Detective Gagné first asked the neighbour if he ever saw Benjamin, his initial response was, “No, not really.”

But then the neighbour later said at the trial that he saw Benjamin no more than five times in the building.

Skolnik reminded the jury that the neighbour “tried to wriggle out of his contradictions” during cross-examination.

“Something can’t be black and white at the same time,” Skolnik said.

Share This Story

(0) Comments