Autopsy findings during the murder trial against Favel

Article content

Thomas Dustyhorn died as a result of a shotgun wound to his head and neck.

A jury officially heard that conclusion Wednesday as the trial of Eric Charles Favel continued in Regina’s Court of King’s Bench.

Article content

The above conclusion on Dustyhorn’s death, formulated by forensic pathologist Shaun Ladham, probably did not come as a surprise to the jurors.

Favel told police in a statement in court that he was attacked in his room at a home on the Kawacatoose First Nation on Nov. 26, 2021. In what he described as an attempt to defend himself, he grabbed what turned around. It turned out to be a 12-gauge shotgun.

Although he told police he did not touch the trigger and did not intend to hurt anyone with the firearm, he acknowledged that it went off, leaving Dustyhorn seriously injured.

The now deceased man had actually tried to help him by stopping the attack, Favel told the interviewer.

What would he say to Dustyhorn if he could?

“I’m sorry. It should never have been like this,” he said.

However, the interrogating officer challenged the suspect with his claim that he was knocked to the ground when the gun went off.

Favel agreed that he harbored a lot of anger toward his stepfather, who he claimed was one of the people who attacked him. But that man told a different story, the officer said, telling police that Favel was allowed to stand up before raising the barrel of the gun. The stepfather told police he grabbed the barrel before the gun went off.

Article content

While the forensic pathologist’s conclusion about the cause of death may not be in question, he was questioned by attorneys on both sides of the case about the path the shotgun bullets took when they caused the fatal wound at Dustyhorn.

Those bullets, from a double bullet, hit the right side of his chin and the floor of his mouth, breaking his jaw, Ladham told prosecutor Arjun Shankar. Some went up to his neck. Some went into his right shoulder and upper back, with a number of exit wounds observed there.

When asked to clarify the trajectory, he said: “It goes backwards, it goes down and it goes a little bit to the right.”

That orientation is only in the body, he noted.

He told the court that surgeons’ efforts affected his ability to determine the precise extent of damage specifically caused by the pellets.

“In this case, they tried as much as they could,” Ladham said. “It was just impossible to stop him bleeding.”

When Ladham was questioned, questions from Jeff Deagle, one of two attorneys working on Favel’s behalf, were brief and related to the process.

The pathologist’s statement did not address the “point of origin” of the shot, he acknowledged.

“Based on the trajectory within the body, you can’t determine whether the person was standing, hunched over, sitting, or something like that,” Deagle told him.

“No, I can’t,” Ladham replied.

The trial will continue on Thursday.

[email protected]

Share this article in your social network