June 02, 2015

GUILTY! Jury finds BC terror couple guilty

Brian LilleyArchive

BC terror couple John Nuttall and Amanda Korody have been found guilty on terrorism related charges over their plan to kill tourists at the British Columbia legislature on Canada 2013.

Recordings of Nuttall and Korody were played throughout the trial, including claims from Nuttall that he wanted to cause more damage and kill more people than the Boston bombers. More than 100 hours of video and audio surveillance were submitted as evidence.

The plot saw pressure cooker bombers planted at the legislature, the pair hoped to use C4 plastic explosives to set off the shrapnel bombs, killing and maiming tourists celebrating the national holiday.

The jury found the couple guilty late Tuesday afternoon but that doesn't mean this case is closed. The defence claims the pair were entrapped and set up, pushed into carrying out their plot by the very RCMP officers that arrested them.

CBC News reports the defence will try to overturn the jury's decision.

Lawyers for Korody and Nuttall say RCMP officers manipulated the pair and maintain that their plan to detonate the bombs at the legislature would not have materialized had they not been pushed by police.

The defence described the couple as former heroin addicts with money issues who were given a purpose when befriended by undercover RCMP officers, who gave them money, clothes and spiritual guidance.

Crown prosecutors argue that standard investigative techniques were used and the pair were fully aware of what they were doing.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-06-13 18:57:29 -0400
Put these two idiots out of our misery. Perfect for our society. They’ll never reoffend. Planning to kill people via terrorism is just not excuseable no matter what kind of mental capacity they have. Islamists are mentally deficient too but I relish in the thought of them becoming mutilated by the average joe on the street when found out.
commented 2015-06-04 10:18:25 -0400
….and there’s the key sticking point, Joan — they had the intent. Maybe they didn’t know how to go about doing what they wanted to, but they definitely wanted to hurt/kill some people (unlike what Jason Bertucci mentioned about a theoretical exercise in robbing a bank). These two are not scapegoats. They may not be the “brains of the operation” (an understatement if there ever was one), but they are far from innocent. But now we have to deal with the politics of defense maneuvering to get these two off…
commented 2015-06-04 08:57:13 -0400
This was an intensive, months-long, expensive investigation. I would prefer RCMP resources were spent on trapping a higher level of terrorist organization than these two. Let’s get some Muslim Brotherhood or Al-Qaeda or ISIS organizers.

It seems these two were easy to prosecute.

It seems we prosecute the mentally ill but pay real terrorists millions of dollars.
commented 2015-06-04 08:52:34 -0400
Charleton G. Always sad when parents reject children who turn out to not be the children they wanted.
commented 2015-06-04 08:44:32 -0400
Prince Knight – The claim is that they didn’t have the brains to plan the attack. There is no doubt they had intent. They got on the radar as former heroin addicts. The claim is they were all bluster but never would have followed through without help from RCMP or someone else. Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad they are off the street. People like them are used by some groups to detonate suicide bombs.

And you are right that the local man who planted the bomb in my small town would have told police who manipulated him. But here is how that goes. Police discount everything he says because, as someone with diminished capacity, they claim nothing he says is credible. That, of course, is just bs for the Crown preferring to prosecute an escape goat than to take on organized (terrorist) crime.
commented 2015-06-03 19:03:05 -0400
Maybe the Ottawa Citizen can let John Nuttall and Amanda Korody write an editorial for the paper?
commented 2015-06-03 18:29:32 -0400
Blair that is a tough one. I guess that is why the USA has conspiracy charges, but conspiring to do something plays with the fine line of charging someone for a pre crime. After all, me and a few buddies could be in our garage with maps and plans to rob a bank. Can we really be charges and do jail time when we haven’t actually committed a crime? The US has this trouble in the 60s dealing with mob bosses. Sure, you could try and convict the guy who was part of the robbery operation, but what could you do about the mob boss? He didn’t actually take part. I’m just asking how does this square with the law and especially our constitutional rights handed down since the Magna Carta? Right? So this couple was charged and convicted with what exactly? The first sentence above doesn’t say there were convicted for committing terrorism, but for “PLANNING to kill tourists”.
commented 2015-06-03 14:58:43 -0400
So now they are guilty, instead of doing the right thing and putting a bullet in their brains, we will coddle, make excuses, get them a puppie and pay for these two animals to live….now that is Justice…Canadian style.
commented 2015-06-03 14:43:56 -0400
If these two were truly of “diminished mental capacity”, as has been claimed, during interrogation they would have given up whoever programmed them. Since nobody else was charged or tried, we can conclude that there was no “backer” or “programmer” or “enabler” (or whichever label you choose). I know personally people of diminished mental capacity; I know people of sound mind and diminished physical capacity. “Simple” people don’t have the wits to keep playacting this long.

Think a minute: how did they get on the RCMP’s radar in the first place? That’s a huge piece of the puzzle, right there.

But of course the defense lawyers will claim whatever they can to either get the charges dismissed, or get their clients off scot-free (true or not)…
commented 2015-06-03 13:57:49 -0400
Hold on everyone, the lawyer hasn’t had the chance to milk the system for every last cent that he can yet!
commented 2015-06-03 13:47:07 -0400
Neither were mentally challenged. I knew Korody when she was a little girl. My daughters were on her softball team in Port Dalhousie. As she entered her teens she became a Goth. Just a weird girl and her adoptive parents had given up on her.
commented 2015-06-03 12:43:39 -0400
Entrapped?! Horse Feathers! They still did it! The intent was still there! Get on with the sentencing already!
commented 2015-06-03 12:24:19 -0400
Ron, yes, I am glad, even if they were manipulated by RCMP, that it was RCMP that used them and not some terrorist organization.
commented 2015-06-03 12:21:00 -0400
Didn’t I read elsewhere that these two defendants have diminished mental capacity? That they are mentally challenged? Lower than average IQ?

In my home town, a man I’d met at a church function, also diminished mental capacity, planted a bomb outside a Sunday morning chuch service and meal for the poor and next door to a shop owned by a Jew that also later had nasty graffiti sprayed on it. There is no way the man had the ability to make the bomb on his own. There is no doubt he had help. But the Crown threw the book at him and only him. That means those who planned it are still loose. In our case, those that used this man were not RCMP.

The bomb never went off because the man who planted it got impatient for it to go off and started bragging about what he’d done.
commented 2015-06-03 11:10:04 -0400
From my experience with naive and impressionable youths like them, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that entrapment could happen, but at the same time, they’d have to have the intent and motivation in the first place to do the crime. I’d give a guilty verdict to them, due to the fact that pressured or bargained into the crime or not, they still planned on doing it and that should be the main consideration.
commented 2015-06-03 10:02:31 -0400
Like they’re going to admit guilt? No, they’ll play the system for all it’s worth. Of course they’re going to claim that the cops entrapped them! What other “defense” is there?
commented 2015-06-03 04:36:56 -0400
I don’t believe an undercover cop could ever convince me to do anything that would compromise my personal integrity. No matter how smooth a talker he/she was, I’d tell them to go take a hike. I’d also report them to the police. Anyone with a shred of common decency would do the same thing. Logically, they don’t have a leg to stand on. However, legally it might be a different matter. Let’s hope not. The appeal will be heard strictly by a judge, and we all know what a bunch of wing-nuts they can be.
commented 2015-06-02 23:09:57 -0400
" their plan to detonate the bombs at the legislature would not have materialized had they not been pushed by police."

It’s all the police’s fault for pushing us into it, cried the two accused! They made us do it! Waaaaahhhhhh, waaaahhhhhh! Mean old police!
commented 2015-06-02 22:53:33 -0400
Joan this story will interest you. As Liza said below thank God it was stopped.
commented 2015-06-02 22:51:47 -0400
I’m sure they are good kids at heart, mean RCMP tricking them like that.

Thank God they were stopped before carrying out such evil.