Spread the love

Kalen Schlatter was sentenced to life in prison for the premeditated murder of the 22-year-old woman.

Tess Richey's killer, Kalen Schlatter, loses appeal.

Open in full screen mode

Kalen Schlatter is charged with the premeditated murder of Tess Richey

  • Jean-Philippe Nadeau (View profile)Jean-Philippe Nadeau

Surprise in the Ontario Court of Appeal: three judges rejected murderer Kalen's arguments on the bench on Tuesday Schlatter, so that the Crown did not even have to present its counter-arguments after the defense. The murderer's lawyers were seeking a new trial because they argued the trial judge made mistakes during the 2020 jury trial.

The three judges of the Ontario Court of Appeal did not give their reasons after dismissing the case out of hand after 10 minutes of deliberations. They will do so in writing at a later date.

They told Crown prosecutor Tracy Kozlowski, that it was useless to hear his arguments.

The trial showed that Kalen Schlatter strangled Tess Richey with a scarf, whom he met in a club in Toronto's gay neighborhood on November 25, 2017 .

Loading15% bonuses to retain health and social services workers

ELSE ON INFO: Bonuses of 15% to retain health and social services workers< p class="StyledBodyHtmlParagraph-sc-48221190-4 hnvfyV">He dragged her into the stairwell of a building under construction, where he had attacked her before killing her.

Unusual fact: the victim's body was found by her mother and a friend of the family a few days later, which drew public ire against the work of the police at the time.

Open in full screen mode

The victim Tess Richey as the we see in an undated photograph that her sister, Rachel, gave to the police when the young woman disappeared.

Kalen Schlatter, now 27, was arrested on February 4, 2018, two months after the crime.

The Torontonian was found guilty of premeditated murder and sentenced to an automatic sentence of life in prison without the right to parole parole before 25 years.

The murderer's two lawyers argued on appeal that the trial judge had to&# x27;first made errors in his instructions to the jury, by not warning them enough about the testimony of an informant.

After his arrest, Kalen Schlatter confided to his cellmate that he had strangled Tess Richey.

The Crown relied in particular in its indictment on the incriminating testimony of the individual, whose identity is still protected by a publication ban.

Lawyer Jessica Zita says the judge gave far too much importance to testimony of the informant […] while these kinds of people are known to be compulsive liars.

Open in full screen mode

From left to right: Defendant Kalen Schlatter, Judge Michael Dambrot and Crown prosecutor Beverley Richards.

The informant in question was a classic informant that we see it in detention, she emphasizes. She asserts that evidence that is unfair and manipulative is unreliable.

Me Zita recalls that Schlatter's defense had suggested that the informant had lied, but that the judge in his instructions to the jurors had insinuated that her testimony was biased.

She further argues that the Crown did not even have mentioned the man in question in his opening arguments while presenting his evidence to jurors. How could she then rely on her testimony to incriminate the accused? she wonders.

Open in full screen mode

From left to right : the Schlatter family, Judge Michael Dambrot, Kalen Schlatter and Crown Attorney Beverley Richards

Kalen Schlatter's lawyers added that the trial judge had downplayed the defense's theory, which raised the possibility that Tessa had been murdered by another suspect, whose identity is also protected under the law. .

In this sense, his client's trial was not fair, according to them, and it did not take place according to the rules of the art.

According to attorney Jeffery Couse, suspect #2 could have entered the building's stairwell without being seen by the construction site's surveillance camera from the backyard of the nearby pet store.

At the time, the individual had been considered a real suspect in the case before the police turned their attention more towards Kalen Schlatter, because he had admitted to investigators that' #x27;he had left his house that evening with the aim of having sex.

Open in full screen mode

During the trial in 2020, Kalen Schlatter's defense called to the witness stand the man they considered at the time to be suspect No. 2 in the murder of Tess Richey.

Me Couse explains that this second suspect could have followed Schlatter and Richey without their knowledge as they left the Crews & Tangos and waiting for Kalen Schlatter to leave after the couple kissed in the stairwell.

The lawyer recalls that suspect #2 had lied to the police at the time about his whereabouts on the evening of the murder.

According to Me Couse, the testimony of the individual was essential to the defense of the accused, but his lawyer during the trial was unable to cross-examine him on the witness stand without constraints, because the judge had refused to do so, thus weakening the position of the defense.

The defense was unable to cross-examine the other suspect on what constituted an alibi, while the Crown was authorized to suggest his own alibi to the jury, he said.

Open in full screen mode

Tess Richey had left the family home of North Bay at the age of 19 to settle in Toronto, where she was killed three years later.

Mr. Couse speaks of a significant error of law which undermined what should have been a compelling defense at the time.

He emphasizes that the harm caused to the accused was aggravated by the uneven way in which the judge summarized, according to him, the testimony of suspect no. 2.

The trial judge placed unfair limits on the defense on what it could ask of the other suspect when he was questioned at the bar, he explains.

He further argues that the magistrate had undermined the alternative suspect theory in its instructions to the jury, submitting rhetorical questions about the individual's testimony.

His instructions to the jurors were not problematic, but the cumulative effect of his presentation suggested to the jury that the theory of the other suspect was implausible, he concluded after having struggled leave with the three judges of the Court of Appeal.

  • Jean-Philippe Nadeau (View profile)Jean-Philippe NadeauFollow
Teilor Stone

By Teilor Stone

Teilor Stone has been a reporter on the news desk since 2013. Before that she wrote about young adolescence and family dynamics for Styles and was the legal affairs correspondent for the Metro desk. Before joining Thesaxon , Teilor Stone worked as a staff writer at the Village Voice and a freelancer for Newsday, The Wall Street Journal, GQ and Mirabella. To get in touch, contact me through my teilor@nizhtimes.com 1-800-268-7116