Could defence lawyers be punished for closing argument in Ibrahim Ali case?

The family of a 13-year-old girl who was sexually assaulted and murdered by Ibrahim Ali in July 2017 said they were “shocked and revolted at the appalling conduct of the defence during the case,” and want the two lawyers to lose their licences.

The family of a 13-year-old girl who was sexually assaulted and murdered by Ibrahim Ali in July 2017 said they were “shocked and revolted at the appalling conduct of the defence during the case” and want the two lawyers to lose their licences.

In his closing argument, lead defence counsel Kevin McCullough suggested the young victim wasn’t innocent, may have been attracted to his client, and that they could have had consensual sex. Under Canadian law, a person must be at least 16 years old to be able to legally consent to sexual activity with an adult.

The jury didn’t buy it, convicting Ali of first-degree murder last Friday.

Outside court on Tuesday, the victim’s brother read a prepared statement that said, in part: “The defence of someone accused of a crime is never easy, but I’m sure there are ways to approach it without re-victimizing and re-traumatizing the surviving family and friends of the victim, and yet that’s exactly what this defence chose to do.”

He added the family is filing formal complaints against McCullough and his co-counsel, and wants to see the two lawyers disbarred. They’re encouraging everyone who’s angry at how the defence was conducted to write to the Law Society of B.C.

But experts don’t see how the lawyers could lose their licences over what they said about the victim in court.

“Lawyers are entitled to be vigorous and at times aggressive in defending their clients,” said former Supreme Court Justice Wally Oppal. “Keep in mind in a murder case, the consequences are huge.”