Defence challenges officers’ actions in documenting bombing suspect’s case

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 18/09/2017 (2724 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Lawyers for a Winnipeg man accused of sending bombs through the mail are raising questions about the way police documented their investigation of the case.

Guido Amsel, 51, faces five counts of attempted murder and several weapons- and explosives-related charges. He’s accused of targeting his ex-wife and local lawyers with homemade explosives, one of which detonated, resulting in his ex-wife’s divorce lawyer losing one of her hands.

As the case entered a voir dire hearing Monday, Amsel’s defence lawyers Saheel Zaman and Jeremy Kostiuk asked provincial court Judge Tracey Lord to allow them to ask pointed questions of certain police officers before the trial begins in earnest.

They want to know why the Winnipeg Police Service officers didn’t appear to include reports on handwriting analysis or tests for explosive substances in the information they used to obtain warrants in Amsel’s case.

Kostiuk said there was a lack of documentation in the officers’ notes about whether they had ever mentioned those reports to anyone investigating the case, including the reports that explained tests for explosive substances based on swabs of Amsel’s hands still had to be confirmed by a lab, and a later report that warned about the likelihood of a false-positive result.

The worst-case scenario of the officers’ lack of note-taking, Kostiuk argued, is “fraudulent non-disclosure.” Cross-examination of the police officers is necessary, he said, to answer questions about whether “this was a good-faith accident, negligence or deceit.”

“There are glaring questions as to the good faith of the Winnipeg police as to ensuring that the affiant had the correct information,” before applying for the warrants, Kostiuk said.

But Crown attorney Chris Vanderhooft said there is no evidence to suggest the police officers did anything to mislead or “subvert” the court process.

He argued the officer who applied for a warrant consulted several investigators and considered various sources of information before he did so. The officer was working with the information he had at the time and may not have even known about the reports, Vanderhooft said. One of the reports, from an RCMP lab, indicated test results for explosive substances were unconfirmed. Another report, from an FBI handwriting analyst, came back inconclusive.

The judge is expected to deliver her decision Tuesday on the request for permission to cross-examine the police officers. It is the first step of the defence challenge to the information police used to obtain a sample of Amsel’s DNA. The judge has to hear arguments on those legal questions before the Crown can start calling witnesses to testify in Amsel’s trial, which is expected to get underway next month.

Amsel faces five counts of attempted murder after letter bombs were sent to his ex-wife and two Winnipeg law firms in July 2015. One of the bombs seriously injured lawyer Maria Mitousis, who had represented Amsel’s ex-wife in a divorce proceeding. He is also charged in relation to an explosion at his ex-wife’s home in 2013.

Amsel was arrested more than two years ago after investigators identified him as a suspect in the mailing of three explosive packages — meant for Amsel’s ex-wife, his ex-wife’s lawyer and his own lawyer, police said at the time.

Mitousis lost her right hand in the blast and had to undergo extensive surgery after a package she opened inside her River Avenue law office exploded July 3, 2015. She was in her office with several co-workers nearby when she handled a package addressed to her that contained a bomb.

Another package, allegedly meant for Amsel’s ex-wife, was delivered to a Winnipeg auto shop on Washington Avenue and later was detonated by police. A third explosive package, also safely detonated by police, was delivered to Amsel’s former lawyer’s office on Stradbrook Avenue.

The series of explosive packages mailed through Canada Post prompted police to encourage the public to be wary of suspicious mail and led to further investigation that eventually resulted in additional charges against Amsel, who has no criminal record.

katie.may@freepress.mb.ca

Twitter: @thatkatiemay