|
|
 |
Beating victim 'fills in the blanks'
Beating victim 'fills in the blanks' - POLICE: Teen makes 'miraculous comeback' from coma- The Markham Economist & Sun
- Thursday, October 14, 1999
by Rick Vanderlinde - Staff Writer
York Regional Police interviewed beating victim Jonathan Wamback last Friday for the first time since he emerged from a
three-month coma.
"Like his dad says, he's a miracle child," Det.-Sgt. Chris Barratt said. "He's making a miraculous comeback from what was a
debilitating, if not life-threatening, injury.
Just two days before the police interview, Barratt said Jonathan wouldn't be ready to be questioned by detectives for some
time.
"He really doesn't seem to have any limits," Barratt said. "It certainly looked grim at one point."
Partially paralyzed less than two weeks ago, Jonathan can now move all four limbs.
Barratt said that Jonathan was able to "fill in some blanks" for police in the attempted murder case.
"It's always fruitful to speak with someone who is the victim and an eye-witness" Barratt said.
Three teens have been charged with trying to kill the 15-year-old Newmarket boy in a June 28 attack.
Jonathan lapsed into a coma in his Stonehaven-area home, several hours after he suffered a brain-stem injury from a blow to
the back of the head.
Detectives were able to interview Jonathan in his home on October 8 after his parents rented an ambulance and medical
equipment to bring him back to Newmarket for the Thanksgiving weekend.
Barratt said that Jonathan may be interviewed further if his recollection of the incident improves.
Last Friday, Mr. Justice William Wolski adjourned the case until November 18 due to "the changing medical condition of the
crown's key witness."
Crown attorney Mary Lou Dickie told the court it was premature to push the case forward since Jonathan's evidence could change
"the complexity of the Crown's case."
Barratt would not say whether Jonathan's story has strengthened the prosecution's attempted murder case, adding that was up to
the Crown attorney to decide.
At least one of the defense lawyers in the case has said the attempted murder charges were not warranted because the victim
was able to get up and walk away after the attack.
[Webmaster's note: If I shoot someone with a gun and he/she walks home but dies later, does that mean that the person who
shot them didn't want them dead? If I kick someone viciously in the head while he/she is lying helplessly on the ground but
he/she manages to walk home before collapsing and almost dying several times on the operating table that same night, does
that mean that I didn't want the victim to die? I don't think the intent is proved by whether or not the victim walks home.
]
"I don't think the facts in the case would support the charges originally laid" Stephen Brown told The Era-Banner prior to
last week's court appearance.
The pivotal issue of whether the case is heard in adult or youth court depends on the severity of the charge.
Under an attempted murder charge, the defense must show why the accused should not be tried in adult court.
If the charge is reduced to aggravated assault, the onus switches to the Crown attorney to prove the case should be heard in
adult court rather than in youth court.
|
|
|
