Justin Breau found not guilty in drug-related shooting death

After about 15 hours of deliberations, a Saint John jury has found Justin David Breau not guilty.

Breau had been charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of Mark Shatford, 42, on Saint John's west side last year.

After getting legal instructions from Mr. Justice Thomas Christie on Thursday morning, the 11-member jury took control of the case just before 12:30 p.m. Thursday.Theysent word at about 3:45 p.m. on Friday that they had reached a verdict.

By 4:30, Breau walked outa free man.

Outside the courthouse, Breau, 37, told reporters that he was eager to see his daughter. That "feels great," he said.

During the trial, the court heard how Breau had developed adrug problem. When asked how he's doing now, Breau said, "Oh, I'm good. I saw mental health while I was in jail, so I'm good to go."

The Crown alleged that Breau had gone to his drug dealer's house to rip him off on the night of Nov. 17, 2019.

While Breau admitted shooting Shatford, he said he did so in self-defence after a drug deal went awry.

Breau testified that he thought Shatford was going to kill him. He said he happened upon a shotgun in the backseat of the vehicle he had borrowed, grabbed it and shot Shatford.

Outside the courthouse, defence lawyer Brian Munro said it's impossible to know what the jurors ultimately based their decision on, "but clearly this was a self-defence case. That was the argument that was advanced in summation. And the jury obviously accepted the air of reality to that defence."

During eight days of testimony, the jury heard from 22 witnesses, including the accused, who was the only witness called by the defence.

In his final summation, Crown prosecutor Patrick Wilbur told the jury that the shooting was the result of"a drug ripoff gone badly wrong." He said Breau went to 321 Duke St. West with two other men to rob a drug dealer.

Wilbur told the jury that Shatford fought back and chased Breau from the apartment and was then shot in the street.

"Mark Shatford died a slow, painful, miserabledeath, almost a month later," he told the jury.

During thetrial, the jury sentan unusually high number of notes to the judge, including one that added nearly a full day to the process.

On Wednesday, the judge received a note from a juror who expressed concern that "a couple" of jurors seemed to have their minds made up about Breau's guilt from the beginning.

That note began a long series of legal discussions about how to handle the issue.

Munro told the court that even with 60 or 70 jury trials under his belt, he had never seen anything like it.

The whole process was protected by a publication ban that extended until a verdict was reached.

The judge's first attempt to get to the bottom of the allegation was to remind jurors of the oath they took at the outset. At its core, he reminded them, was a promise to keep an open mind throughout the entire process.

He asked them to take a break and consider whether they were able to live up to their oath.

"If you can't commit to that, you owe it to everyone involved, and the community, to let the deputy know and we can solve the problem," Christie told them.

No one stepped forward at that stage, so it was back to the drawing board.

In the end, the judge and lawyers for the Crown and defence agreed on a plan that would see all 13 jurors brought into court, one at a time, and questioned about whether they had already made up their minds.

Based on the answers given the details of which are covered by a publication ban the judge said extended "in perpetuity" two jurors were dismissed.

The Crown suggested the note writer also be dismissed, but the judge decided that wasn't necessary.

Under the law, a minimum of 10 jurors are needed for deliberations. Fourteen jurors were initially selected and one was dismissed on the first day of the trial after he disclosed a family connection to the justice system. With the two dismissed on Wednesday, that brought the number down to 11.