Defence in Air India trial calls last witness; sides prepare final arguments
The Crown alleges the attack on Air India, the worst act of terrorism in Canadian history, was also carried out to punish the Indian government for its treatment of Sikhs.


VANCOUVER,August 27, 2004
CP

The defence in the Air India case called its final witness Friday, ending another segment of the lengthy trial that included insults and angry outbursts, expletives, an admitted drug dealer and witnesses with shaky credibility.

The Crown closed its months-long case in mid-May. Lawyers for the two accused bombers spent about three months calling their own witnesses.

The two sides were expected to tie up loose ends Monday before taking a break of several weeks while they prepare final submissions for Justice Ian Josephson.

The defence got off to a troubled start in June when one of its first witnesses prompted city police to launch an investigation into his claims.

Raminder Singh (Mindy) Bhandher, 26, was testifying on behalf of accused Air India bomber Ripudaman Singh Malik, who Bhandher said he regarded as a generous father figure.

But during his testimony, Bhandher also acknowledged a lengthy history of drug dealing, smuggling and fraud.

The man told the court he knew who was responsible for a Sept. 10, 2000, gangland shooting in Vancouver that led to the retaliatory murder of his cousin.

The Crown alleges Malik and co-accused Ajaib Singh Bagri were part of a group of B.C. Sikh separatists who plotted against India's national airline in retaliation for an Indian army attack in June 1984 against the Golden Temple, Sikhism's holiest shrine.

Another defence witness suffered a heart attack in Vancouver and his testimony had to be delayed.

Daljit Singh Sandhu, who has also been accused but never charged of being involved in the bombing plot, fell ill over the weekend, just before he was set to address the court.

When he did testify _ describing himself as a peaceful, devout Sikh leader _ he shouted expletives at a Crown prosecutor who alleged he knew about the bombing plot and selectively warned friends to fly another day.

``Bullshit!'' Daljit Singh Sandhu yelled from the witness stand.

The Crown alleges the attack on Air India, the worst act of terrorism in Canadian history, was also carried out to punish the Indian government for its treatment of Sikhs.

A star witness who cannot be identified testified earlier for the Crown that Malik had Sandhu pick up the tickets for the flight that were used to smuggle explosive-laden bags on board.

Sandhu, 67, called the accusation ridiculous, saying he is far too important for Malik to ask to run his errands and that he could never advocate or assist in violent acts.

The trial has taken place for more than a year in a specially built courtroom.

During its case, the Crown said the first bomb blast ripped through Tokyo's Narita airport and killed two baggage handlers transferring suitcases from Vancouver to an Air India flight.

Less than an hour later, Air India Flight 182, en route from Toronto to India, exploded off the coast of Ireland, killing all 329 aboard.

The defence's witnesses, many of whom have been damaged under cross-examination, included the former roommate of another star Crown witness. The roommate, like others, had trouble remembering things.

Balbir Singh Gharala spent several days on the witness stand but his evidence conflicted with several statements he made a week earlier.

While testifying on behalf of Bagri, Gharala said he didn't remember telling the court he'd lied to immigration officials about when he arrived in the United States, even when prosecutor Richard Cairns read his statements from court transcripts.

``Do you remember that?''' asked Cairns.

``No,'' Gharala said.

``This was just a week ago,'' said Cairns.

Cairns told the court that Bagri's brothers in Canada and India tried to find witnesses who would lie for the accused terrorist.

They came up with four people who all hail from Bagri's ancestral Punjabi village of Chak Kalan.

One of those men, Kamal Jit, testified at the trial, but the other three changed their story when a prosecution team went to India to interview them a few months ago, Cairns told the court earlier this month.

All four men gave affidavits to the Bagri defence team suggesting that a key Crown witness known as John had admitted he was lying when he implicated Bagri in the Air India bombing.

At one point while Jit was on the stand, the judge called a sudden recess after Cairns suggested Jit was an ``idiot.''

That same witness also admitted that he spent several days on the stand answering questions in English he couldn't understand.

Jit was called by the defence to try to discredit John, an FBI informant who was paid almost $460,000 by the RCMP to tell his story in court. John claimed Bagri confessed to him that he helped plot the June, 1985 bomb attack that killed 329 people.

The defence's case even had a connection _ however tenuous _ to documentary filmmaker Michael Moore and the popular movie Fahrenheit 911.

Retired FBI agent Jack Cloonan, a commentator on U.S. news shows who makes an appearance in Moore's latest film, was called as a witness for Bagri. Cloonan criticized another FBI agent who testified for the Crown.

Cloonan told court agent Ron Parrish should have told his superiors earlier about an interview Parrish had with a close female friend of Bagri's.

Parrish was key to gaining the woman's confidence and court heard she eventually told him that Bagri had borrowed her car to deliver suitcases to the airport the day of the bombing. Parrish told his superiors about the statement two years later.

The woman refused to repeat the statement when called to testify.

Cloonan would not tell reporters how much he was paid to testify in Vancouver.

He gave no reason as to why he would appear on behalf of a suspected terrorist after spending his career fighting terrorists.

The Crown accused him of weighing in on a case he knew nothing about.

The defence case for Malik was short while Bagri's lasted somewhat longer.

Both men chose not to testify in their own defence.

Malik's representatives offered no opening or closing statement and left the court, saying only that they felt the case went very well.

Malik and Bagri have spent the last four years in jail after being charged with plotting the attack.