Jury deliberating in manslaughter trial of dead tot's father
Daniel Williams had to know Kierra Elektra Starr Williams was being abused by partner, Crown charges
WARNING: This article contains graphic details that some readers may find disturbing.
Kierra Elektra Starr Williams was painted as a toddler who went from a picture of health to a picture of child abuse during closing arguments in the manslaughter trial for the child's father.
"She was bruised, she was battered, she was tossed around like a rag doll," Crown attorney Daniel Chaput told the 12 jurors in his address.
Daniel Williams is charged with failing to provide the necessaries of life and manslaughter in connection with his daughter's 2014 death.
A Manitoba jury began deliberating late Monday afternoon after the Crown and defence made closing arguments. The jury must select one of three possible verdicts: that Williams is not guilty, that he is not guilty of manslaughter but guilty of failure to provide the necessaries of life, or that he is guilty of manslaughter.
Kierra died of blunt force trauma to the abdomen in 2014 at the hands of her mother. However, court has heard the 21-month-old toddler suffered months of physical abuse, sustained numerous injuries and was "starving" and "withering," Chaput said.
The Crown hoped to convince the jury Williams knew his partner was abusing the child, bore witness to some of it and failed to take the necessary steps to protect his daughter from "repeated injury" — his legal duty as a father.
Failure was 'prolonged'
"His failure was prolonged, repeated, willful and deliberate," Chaput told the jury. "He made a choice to do nothing … a decision, we say, endangered the life of his child and contributed to her death."
Doctors and nurses who testified during the trial said Kierra was drastically underweight and malnourished when she died. She had multiple skull and rib fractures, a dislocated elbow and shoulder, numerous bruises and abrasions, a piece of flesh missing from her nose and five teeth missing due to "traumatic injury."
Chaput reminded jurors that medical staff were "horrified" and "brought to tears" by the toddler's tiny, battered body.
"How could [Williams] not have known what was happening?," Chaput asked jurors.
His failure was prolonged, repeated, willful and deliberate.- Crown attorney Daniel Chaput on defendant Daniel Williams
The Crown pointed to testimony Williams gave to RCMP where he acknowledged his partner was at times "rough" with the toddler. He told police in 2015 he saw his spouse carrying Kierra by the wrist and heard the child's head hit the floor, on more than one occasion while she was in another room with her mother.
Chaput also reminded jurors Williams told police he should have taken Kierra to the doctor, but neglected to do so out of fear his two other children would be taken by Child and Family Services.
In closing, the Crown detailed three key elements of manslaughter that jurors had to agree the evidence met, in order to find Williams guilty. Chaput said they had to agree Williams:
- Committed an unlawful act.
- The unlawful act was dangerous.
- The unlawful act contributed to death.
"Just because Daniel Williams did not directly cause Kierra Williams' death, his failure to provide those necessaries significantly contributed to her death," Chaput told the jury.
Williams not responsible for death: lawyer
In Williams's defence, lawyer Greg Brodsky argued his client could not be held responsible for the child's death because he did not harm her and he could not predict Kierra would be killed by her mother.
"If the child was shot, would Daniel Williams be responsible?" Brodsky said to the jury. "He can't foresee the child would be murdered."
Brodsky told the jury Williams was not the primary caregiver and was not around to witness the abuse. He reminded court that Williams told police he was not aware she had any broken bones and was "fed stories" by his partner as to why the child was injured.
Even if Williams had taken Kierra to hospital, "How does that prevent murder?" Brodsky asked the jury.
Brodsky reminded the jury his client is presumed innocent and if the best they can say is "he is probably guilty," then their duty is to acquit.
In his closing arguments, Brodsky made reference to a recent "Saskatchewan trial" — apparently alluding to the controversial acquittal of Gerald Stanley in the murder of Indigenous teen Colton Boushie.
"I don't want to argue a Saskatchewan [angle] here," Brodsky said, adding "You come from different walks of life" and "may or may not know life on reserve" and "may or may not be parents."
The jury, comprised of nine men and three women, must now consider all of the evidence entered in court.
During her instructions, Justice Sadie Bond reminded the jurors they are the judges of facts and they must make their decision without sympathy, prejudice or the influence of public opinion.