End trial now, say defence lawyers in Boom Boom Room shooting case

Defence lawyers representing two Brampton men charged with the 2014 shooting of a bouncer at a downtown Windsor nightclub argued Wednesday there is not enough evidence for the trial to proceed.

The judge in the case has already thrown out evidence of a trace amount of gunshot residue detected on one of the men’s hands, ruling police violated his right to call a lawyer. Police recovered a 9mm handgun, but the male DNA on it did not match either man. The bouncer testified earlier in the trial he has no idea who shot him.

Kevin Mantley Nyadu, 22, is charged with attempted murder and five firearm offences in Pierce’s shooting at the Boom Boom Room on Oct. 5, 2014. Shadrack Kwame Amankwa, 26, is charged with being an accessory to attempted murder, as well as five firearm offences.

At the time of the incident, Amankwa was bound by a court order prohibiting him from possessing any firearm or ammunition. He is additionally charged with two breaches of a court order.

Defence lawyers Patricia Brown and Julie Santarossa argued the Crown has not presented sufficient evidence to convict either man. They made applications to the judge to end the trial without having to call defence evidence.

But assistant Crown attorney Tim Kavanagh argued both men were seen running from the Ouellette Avenue nightclub after shots rang out. They were arrested near the corner of Victoria Avenue and Park Street. In the bushes nearby, police found a 9mm handgun believed to have been used to shoot bouncer Devonte Pierce in the back.

The bullet narrowly missed Pierce’s spine, but damaged a kidney.

Pierce testified he was shot as he was bouncing a group from the bar. He was in the process of pushing a man in a red shirt out the door when he was shot.

Another witness said the shooter was wearing a red shirt.

While no one could positively identify Nyadu as the shooter, he was wearing a red shirt when he was arrested minutes after the shooting.

Kavanagh called that evidence “compelling.”

Superior Court Justice J. Paul Howard said, between being sent out of town to hear other cases, and the complexity of the arguments before him, he will need time to write a ruling on the defence application.

The case will return to court late next month.