A Guelph man has been found guilty a second time of attempted murder in relation to a 2018 stabbing.
The verdict comes after a new trial was held in the case against Anthony Bruzzese, whose 2021 conviction – which came with an eight-year prison sentence – was overturned by the Ontario Court of Appeal.
The new trial was held in September, six years after the incident itself.
In May 2023, the accused successfully got a new trial ordered after he argued justice Gordon Lemon made errors during the first trial.
During the proceedings, it’s reported Lemon told jurors to ignore a suggestion by the defence that a lack of the victim’s blood on Bruzzese’s clothes does give rise to reasonable doubt.
At the time, Lemon noted “conflicting” evidence about mutual cocaine use the night of the attack.
“The trial judge’s errors were material, went to the main pillars of the defence, and therefore could likely have affected the outcome of the trial,” the appeal court ruled. “They created trial unfairness by undercutting the main thrust of the defence. The crown’s case was not overwhelming.”
The incident happened in Sept. 2018 in the parking lot of a Food Basics in south Guelph after an argument over cocaine.
A Superior Court document noted Bruzzese had met the victim for the first time a few hours before at a bar. The two drank and had a conversation, which continued at another establishment.
The two encountered a third individual unknown to both Bruzzese and the victim.
All three left the bar around 1:30 a.m. and went to the victim’s home to continue drinking.
Bruzzese provided cocaine for the three of them.
“(The third person testified he) and Mr. Bruzzese each did one line of coke,” the latest court document shows. “When it came to (the victim’s) turn, instead of just doing the last prepared line, he snorted all the remaining cocaine on the desk.”
Bruzzese reportedly became angry, and threatened the victim.
The two eventually left the victim’s home.
Court documents later show the victim ran toward the two in the parking lot, calling out “I want to be friends with you” and “wait for me.”
The third person claimed he was about 20 metres away when he saw Bruzzese “make two thrusting motions toward (the victim’s) stomach with a closed fist.”
“After the first motion, (the victim) took a short step back and buckled at the knees,” the report said, adding the victim was already falling down when the second motion was made.
After a few moments, Bruzzese and the third person shook hands and parted ways.
The item used to stab the victim was not recovered. The Crown alleged it was a pocketknife belonging to Bruzzese.
The victim was spotted by a passerby, who called for help.
Forensic evidence showed blood belonging to the victim was found on the third man’s shirt.
The man said he believes the victim cut his hand earlier in the evening, when the man tried taking away a kitchen knife from the victim.
It’s believed the blood transferred to the man’s clothing after the victim pushed him away in the parking lot.
No blood was found on Bruzzese’s clothing.
During the first trial, the defence suggested the lack of blood on Bruzzese’s clothes was “strong evidence that (he) was not the stabber.”
Lemon, however, noted the jury couldn’t infer doubt from the lack of DNA.
The defence’s position was that there was no forensic evidence linking Bruzzese to the stabbing and “from the evidence that the stab wounds may have been self-inflicted.”
Justice Cynthia Petersen says the theory “is not frivolous, given the evidence of (the victim’s) bipolar condition, depressed mood, state of intoxication and expressed threat to kill himself with a kitchen knife.”
She later said the possibility that the victim stabbed himself twice in another location, outside the apartment, and then walked to the parking lot “is far-fetched.”
“There is no evidence of his blood anywhere other than the smudge on the frame of his patio door, and the large pool of blood that accumulated beside him on the ground in the parking lot,” Petersen said.
“Given the severity of his injuries and the blood loss that he sustained, I infer that he could not have walked a significant distance, after stabbing himself, without leaving a trail of blood. I am satisfied, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he sustained the stabbing wounds in the Food Basics parking lot.”
After the second trial, Petersen summarized that the Crown proved “beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Bruzzese meant to kill (the victim) when he stabbed him.”
“Mr. Bruzzese’s words and actions, the nature and severity of the harm he inflicted, and his disregard for (the victim’s) life and wellbeing after the fact, are compelling evidence of his intention to kill,” she wrote.
In addition, she noted Bruzzese stated more than once that the victim “was unworthy of life, and that it would be easy to kill him.”
“In the minutes prior to the stabbing, at the Food Basics plaza, he threatened to kill (the victim) if (the third man) did not convince (the victim) to go back home,” Petersen wrote.
“He then stabbed (the victim) with sufficient force to puncture his abdomen. Twice. Then he left (him) lying on the ground in (an) empty parking lot where he was unlikely to be noticed by anyone who could render or summon emergency medical assistance.
“The only reasonable inference that can be drawn from the totality of the evidence is that Mr. Bruzzese intended to kill.”
