In Ottawa, a man faced with first-degree murder charges for the second time saw his case collapse before trial due to prosecution management issues. Defence lawyers successfully argued that the right to a timely trial had been violated in a case involving a drive-by shooting targeting three brothers in 2021, resulting in two deaths. Following the ruling by Superior Court Justice Ian Carter, one of the accused, Ahmed Siyad, walked free, while Abdullahi “Avon” Osman, who has now evaded two first-degree murder trials, remained in custody due to an outstanding warrant.
Justice Carter emphasized that when trial delays exceed the prescribed limit without exceptional circumstances, a stay of proceedings is the only remedy. The case’s collapse is due to the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2016 Jordan decision, which guarantees the right to a trial within a reasonable time frame.
The trial, initially set for June last year, faced jeopardy due to delays and was further disrupted when the defence requested data from two phones just before the trial was set to begin. The subsequent cancellation of the June trial led to new trial dates in March this year, culminating in the defence seeking a stay of proceedings due to undue delay.
Responding to the decision, Osman’s lawyer, Leora Shemesh, emphasized the importance of upholding the law, despite potential dissatisfaction from those seeking a trial. The lead investigator revealed that data from the victims’ phones was withheld to protect privacy interests, as no relevant information to the case was found.
The targeted bounty killings of two brothers and an attempted murder in a busy parking lot in Ottawa were allegedly orchestrated by Osman, with Siyad and another individual carrying out the shooting. The surviving brother revealed the brothers had bounties on their heads following a significant robbery in the Dominican Republic.
Osman, previously accused of a 2015 murder, saw charges withdrawn due to mishandling of a witness. The latest trial collapse left Osman and Siyad in contemplation, with the judge delivering his decision as they sat quietly. Defense counsel and assistant Crown prosecutors were also present during the proceedings.