Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

On October 17, 2001, at a trial held before Mr. Justice Romilly and a jury, the two Appellants, David Brock Henry and Barry Wayne Riley, were convicted of the first degree murder of Timothy Langmead. The homicide of Langmead occurred at Port Coquitlam on June 8, 1994. The Appellants had originally been charged with the murder of Langmead in January 1995 and they were both convicted by a jury of first degree murder in late 1996. The Court of Appeal heard an appeal from those convictions in December 1998. By reason of what was found to be an erroneous instruction to the jury concerning intoxication, a new trial was ordered for both Appellants.

At a party held on June 7, 1994 in Lytton, the Appellant, Barry Wayne Riley, spoke with the Appellant, David Brock Henry, about possibly doing a “drug rip-off” in the Lower Mainland. The two men enlisted another young man, Gabe Abbott, to drive with them to Coquitlam. Riley had helped set up a grow operation in a house in Coquitlam that was being looked after by Timothy Langmead. The common theme in both trials was that Langmead was surprised to encounter Riley with Abbott and Henry. Riley and Henry subdued Langmead and secured him to a chair. Langmead eventually suffocated. The three men removed the deceased’s body from the house and threw it into the Fraser River. Nine days later, Langmead’s body was found.

Henry and Riley were arrested in January 1995 and were both charged with the first degree murder of Langmead. At the initial trial, both Appellants advanced the defence of intoxication. The jury rejected that defence and convicted both men of first degree murder. At the second trial before Romilly J. and a jury, the Appellant Henry continued to advance the defence of intoxication. By contrast, the Appellant Riley largely resiled from asserting the defence of intoxication. Both men, through their counsel, admitted their responsibility for homicide of the degree of manslaughter. The only live issue at trial was the degree of responsibility of the men for the homicide. The police had ultimately been able to gain the confidence of the Appellants and to obtain admissions from both men. The two Appellants were convicted of first degree murder. On appeal, subsequent to the argument of the appeal, counsel for the Appellants sought leave to raise an additional ground of appeal and the Court of Appeal permitted the raising of the additional ground arising from two recent decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada. The majority dismissed the appeal. Hall J.A. dissenting held that the learned trial judge erred in permitting Crown counsel to cross-examine the Appellant on statements he made in prior testimony at his first trial.