Rayner trial hears closing arguments

The case against John Rayner in the killing of Chrystal Beairsto is circumstantial, but is enough for a conviction, the Crown said Friday,

The defence said police were blinded by DNA.

Crown prosecutor John Diamond spent several hoursbefore Justice Wayne Cheverie Friday morning, piecing together the case against Rayner, who ischarged with first-degree murder in thekilling of the 23-year-old mother of two in the summer of 2002.

The key piece of the puzzle, said Diamond, is the DNA evidence found on Beairsto's body and at the murder scene. Experts testified it wasn't an absolute match with Rayner's, but there were "strong indications" it was his.

Beairsto was found in a wooded area near the Confederation Trail on July 28, 2002. She had been stabbed and strangled.

Two witnesses said they saw Rayner on the Confederation Trail the afternoon of the killing. A third testified that the day before, Rayner was watching and following her while she was working out.

The Crown insisted Rayner's own statements confirm he was near the scene of the crime that day.

Diamond painted Rayner as a skilled liar, changing his answers to explain away that evidence.

Police interviewed Rayner four times. At first, Diamond said, Rayner told police he and Chrystal Beairsto were friends, that they walked together, biked together, play wrestled together and that he even bit her toe once.

Rayner also told police he walked the trails almost every day and may have seen Beairsto the day she was killed.

But as time went on, Diamond contended, Rayner's story changed.The accused man told police he and Beairsto were just casual acquaintances. He insisted he wasn't on the trail that day, he didn't see Beairsto, and may not have seen her for weeks or even months before she died.

Diamond pointed out that when police offered Rayner an opportunity to explain where he was the day of the murder, or who he was with, he refused. The only information Rayner did offer, Diamond says, was an attempt to explain away the DNA evidence he thought police had against him.

Police had 'tunnel vision'

Rayner's lawyer, Chris Manning, presented his closing arguments Friday afternoon, accusing investigators of being blinded by DNA evidence in their pursuit of Rayner.

Experts concluded the DNA on the cord used to bind Beairsto's hands was "possibly"Rayner's, said Manning. It wasn't a definite match.

Manning pointed out some evidence points at other suspects, including Beairsto's partner, Al MacKenzie.

"The police had tunnel vision for Rayner," said Manning.

Referring to the witnesses who saw Rayner on the trail that day, Manning conceded his client may have looked out of place, but noted he didn't confront, assault or threaten any of the witnesses.

Manning pointed out Beairsto had a small amount of alcohol in her system, and her hair was shiny and combed. He suggested that's not consistent with someone out biking, but someone in a social setting. Beairsto was tied up by someone she knew well, he suggested, and the scene was set up to look like a sexual assault to cover up a murder.

He reminded the judge when MacKenzie was told of her murder, the first thing he said was "Was she raped?"

'It's troublesome, that Rayner's DNAkeeps coming up.' — Justice Wayne Cheverie

As for Rayner changing his story to police, Manning said he was being asked to explain the inexplicable - how his DNA could've been found at the scene when he wasn't there. Manning said Rayner adamantly and consistently maintained his innocence through hours and hours of police questioning. Rayner didn't take the stand in his defence, his lawyer said, because he had nothing more to say.

Justice Wayne Cheverie is clearly wrestling with the DNA evidence and what judicial weight he should give it.

"It's troublesome, that Rayner's DNA keeps coming up," said Cheverie, and not the DNA of any of the other potential suspects.

Cheverie needs time to review all the evidence and the arguments. He'll give his decision June 15.