• Home
  • About
    • About Christopher di Armani
    • Disclosure Statement
    • Code of Ethics
    • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Gun Laws 101
  • FPO Violators
  • Store
  • Donate
  • Hire Me

Christopher di Armani.com

In Praise of Individual Rights and Freedoms

  • Top 25
  • Big Brother
    • Access To Information
    • Bureaucratic Incompetence
    • Bureaucrat’s Rule #1
    • Censorship
    • Feeding at the Government Trough
    • Lemonade Freedom
  • Common Sense
    • Expressions of Gratitude
    • Good Samaritans
    • Good Stuff
    • In Memoriam — Remembering our Heros
    • Life
    • Personal Responsibility
    • Politically Correct Madness
  • Courts
    • Abusive Prosecutions
    • Civil Forfeiture
    • Human Rights Tribunals
    • Judicial Corruption
    • Justice Denied
    • Justice System Abuses
    • Police Sentencing Double-Standards
    • Prosecutorial Misconduct
    • SLAPP Lawsuits
  • Crime
    • Abuse of Trust
    • Canadian Mass Murders
    • Firearm Prohibition Orders
    • Human Depravity
    • Immigration Issues
    • Racism
    • Restraining Orders
    • Sexual Predators
    • Violent Criminals
    • Wrongful Convictions
  • Guns
    • Concealed Carry
    • Dial 9-1-1 and Die
    • Firearms Act
    • Fun Gun Stuff
    • Gun Control
    • Gun-Free Zones
    • Gun Politics
    • Gun Registration
    • Negligent Discharges
    • Target Shooting Competitions
  • Islam
    • Canadian Islamic Disgraces
    • Islamic Terrorism
    • Radical Islam
    • Sharia Law
    • The Religion Of Peace
  • Police
    • Abuse of Police Authority
    • Filming Police
    • Great Police Officers
    • Officer Down
    • Police Brutality
    • Police Corruption
    • Police Misconduct
    • RCMP Accountability
    • RCMP Hall of Shame
    • Warrantless Searches
  • Politics
    • Elections
    • Ethics in Politics
    • Political Antics
    • Political Corruption
    • Social Justice
    • Stupid Human Tricks
    • Union Bay Improvement District
  • Rights
    • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
    • Constitutional Violations
    • Freedom of Assembly
    • Freedom of Religion
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Property Rights
    • Privacy Rights
    • Self-Defense
    • Unreasonable Search and Seizure

Peter Khill: Self-Defence Case Goes to Supreme Court

Published August 11, 2020 by Christopher di Armani Filed Under: Courts, Guns, Rights, Self-Defense


Good news for Peter Khill, of Hamilton, Ontario. The Supreme Court will hear his self-defence case.

For those unfamiliar with Peter Khill or the circumstances surrounding this trip the the highest court in the land, here is a brief recap.

February 4, 2016, 3:00am

Millie Benko, Peter Khill’s girlfriend (and now wife) awoke to the sounds of someone banging outside. She woke up Peter, who also heart, woke him to say she heard someone banging outside. He heard two loud bangs and looked out the window. The lights of his truck were on, meaning someone was then or had recently been inside his vehicle.

Mr. Khill’s his military training kicked in when he perceived a threat to himself and his girlfriend. He loaded the shotgun he kept in the bedroom and went to investigate the noises.

He discovered Jonathan Styres, a criminal with a lengthy record, inside his truck.

Khill yelled at the unwelcome intruder to raise his hands. When Styres turned to him instead with something in his hands, Khill shot him twice.

Styres died at the scene.

June 27, 2018

On June 27, 2018, the jury acquitted Peter Khil of second-degree murder.

The usual race-baiting suspects screamed foul, claiming Jonathan Styres was killed because of his race (Indigenous) and not the fact he was a career criminal in the process of stealing yet another vehicle.

At the time of his death, Jonathan Styres was out on bail for stealing vehicles, breaching probation, possession of stolen property and assaulting a police officer. This information was all excluded from Peter Khill’s trial.

Christie Blatchford sat through the entire trial, which gave her a unique perspective on how the judicial process unfolded in this case. Those crying loudest for race-based justice did not, of course, bother to attend the trial.

From her column Race was not a factor in the Peter Khill verdict.

How interesting it always is to cover a criminal trial and to actually be there and thus get the feel of the thing, only to be sternly corrected after the verdict is in by those who never set foot in the courtroom.

Crown appealed the acquittal.

February 26, 2020

On February 26, 2020, the Ontario Court of Appeals overturned Peter Khill’s acquittal and ordered a new trial on the charge of second degree murder.

From R. v. Khill, 2020 ONCA 151.

[1]         The respondent, Peter Khill, shot and killed Jonathan Styres. He was charged with second degree murder. At trial, Mr. Khill testified that he shot Mr. Styres in self-defence, believing Mr. Styres was armed and about to shoot him.

[2]         There were two issues at trial – did Mr. Khill act in self-defence, and if he did not, did he have the mens rea required for murder?[1] The self-defence claim, if accepted, would lead to an acquittal. The mens rea issue would, at best for Mr. Khill, result in a manslaughter conviction. The jury acquitted, indicating that it had a reasonable doubt on self-defence.

[3]         The Crown advances four grounds of appeal. Three allege misdirection in respect of self-defence. The fourth challenges the admissibility of the evidence of Dr. Laurence Miller, an expert called by the defence. The Crown’s oral argument focused on the alleged misdirection.

[4]         I would allow the appeal and order a new trial. I agree with the Crown’s submission that the trial judge failed to instruct the jury to consider Mr. Khill’s conduct during the incident leading up to the shooting of Mr. Styres when assessing the reasonableness of that shooting. I do not agree that the trial judge made the other errors advanced by the Crown.

My fervent prayer is for Peter Khill to emerge victorious at the Supreme Court. Time will tell if that prayer is answered favourably.

Author

  • Christopher di Armani
    Christopher di Armani

    Christopher di Armani is a freedom-loving Amazon bestselling author and current events commentator from Lytton, BC, Canada, who strives to awaken the passion for liberty inside every human being.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Tags: career criminal, Jonathan Styres, Peter Khill, race-based court decisions, self-defence, Supreme Court

Did you find value in this article?

If you found this article useful or it contained valuable information and you want to thank me, the best way is to buy me a coffee or two.

1. Send an Interac eTransfer to author @ christopherdiarmani.net (remove spaces)

2. Send via PayPal using this link: https://www.paypal.me/ThatLibertyGuy

3. Use your credit card in my online store to support me with a one-time donation, a monthly recurring donation, or an annual donation. See these links for all the details about the thank-you gifts I offer my supporters.

Comments

  1. Doug Miller says

    August 11, 2020 at 9:08 am

    I don’t think the defense proved that the victim was armed and that he intended to kill the shooter. Further the shooter set the stage for a potentially armed response by arming himself with the shotgun. If he had approached unarmed, the victim if armed could not easily accurately shoot back at Khill without exiting the vehicle and Khill could have easily run into a semi safe location before any shots were fired.. I don’t have any particular sympathy for the victim only that Khill should not have responded in an armed fashion

    Reply
    • Brian says

      August 12, 2020 at 10:23 pm

      You must be a Liberal, can’t think of any other reason for such a stupid analysis,you weren’t there no one can understand what fear the accused felt or experienced and the Jury in my opinion made the right decision,as anyone(other than. Liberal). would have made!!!!

      Reply
    • Joe says

      August 13, 2020 at 9:18 am

      apply your insane “logic” to police officers too then. Oh what’s that? They have to be armed at all times? Hypocrite!

      Reply
  2. Steve Barragan says

    August 11, 2020 at 7:50 pm

    Hope and pray Khill is acquitted as well. For people like myself who live in a remote area, a vehicle is an absolute life line for myself and the family. They used to hang horse thieves remember?

    Reply
  3. Robert Klay says

    August 12, 2020 at 8:44 am

    Mr Miller you are a foolish and naive man. No matter what the perp was armed with, he was ready to do violence against a law abiding citizen of this once fine country.
    Remember when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

    Reply
  4. John Doe says

    August 12, 2020 at 3:21 pm

    It is incoceivable that anyone would think Peter should have gone to save his property unarmed. Vehicle thieves are no different than any other kind of thief. Most would fight, and most carry a weapon of some sort. To think that anyone should approach a thief unarmed is beyond stupid. If the thief was armed with a pistol, shooting out of a vehicle window from close range is extremely easy. Had the thief responded properly when covered by a weapon, he would still be alive. Since he seems to have made a threatening move, Khill appears to have no choice. Was Khill supposed to wait until attacked and perhaps wounded before he could respond? And if people no longer have a right to defend their homes, family and property, then we no longer live in a free country. Oh wait…. we haven’t for some 50 decades now – ever since PET destroyed our rights with his constitution that eliminated them.

    Reply
  5. big D says

    October 14, 2021 at 7:54 am

    nobody was there so Khill could be lying that the victim motioned and simply opened fire!…with no video the onus is on Khill to prove beyond a doubt that reasonable force was used….no other guns were found! if Khill shot your kid for stealing apples would you be ok??…of course not!

    Reply
    • Christopher di Armani says

      October 14, 2021 at 10:21 pm

      Sure, Peter Khill could be lying. Anything is possible. But it’s not likely, IMO.

      And if my kid was shot while breaking into someone else’s vehicle so he could steal it, yeah, I’d be furious…. but not at the person who killed him. I’d feel sorry for them that my moron kid put them in such a terrible position. I’d be furious at my kid for being so monumentally stupid that he won a Darwin Award.

      While it’s an inconvenient truth, the young man who died was a career criminal who routinely stole vehicles and other property. He was no angel or role model for anyone.

      Is it sad he died while committing his last crime? Of course it is. He didn’t have to die, but he made his choice long before he crossed Peter Khill’s path.

      Whether the Supreme Court finds Mr. Khill guilty or not, that young man died because of the choices he made. He should be an object lesson for young criminals everywhere. Stop being so monumentally stupid and you won’t die too young.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to my commentaries

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Pinterest
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Latest Tweets

Follow @ThatLibertyGuy

Christopher di Armani 🇨🇦 🇺🇸
@ThatLibertyGuy

  • New comment: Canadian Gun Laws: A Primer for People Who Don’t Know Much About Gun Laws christopherdiarmani.com/15213/guns/can…
    about 1 week ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • New comment: Blake Harvey’s Murder Proves We Don’t Value Children’s Lives christopherdiarmani.com/17398/police/g…
    about 1 week ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • New comment: All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing christopherdiarmani.com/8275/human-rig…
    about 1 week ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • New comment: Paul Rogan Passes: The End of an Era christopherdiarmani.com/18908/common-s…
    about 1 week ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite
  • New comment: RCMP Sergeant Douglas Smith appeals conditional discharge for illegal handgun christopherdiarmani.com/2439/police/ab…
    about 1 week ago
    Reply Retweet Favorite

Most Popular This Week

  • All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
  • Dale Merle Nelson’s 1970 Murder Spree in Creston, British Columbia
  • How did Live-Streaming Rape Become a ‘Thing’?
  • Florida Police arrest a 12-year-old for farting. Have they lost their minds?
  • Yvon Mercier: From RCMP Depot Trainer to Double-Murderer
  • Why the Flood of Firearm Registration Certificates in My Mailbox?
  • Violent N.B. Drug Dealer Nicholas Bain Finally Arrested

Most Popular This Month

  • All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing
  • Dale Merle Nelson’s 1970 Murder Spree in Creston, British Columbia
  • RCMP Sergeant Douglas Smith appeals conditional discharge for illegal handgun
  • How did Live-Streaming Rape Become a ‘Thing’?
  • Yvon Mercier: From RCMP Depot Trainer to Double-Murderer
  • Florida Police arrest a 12-year-old for farting. Have they lost their minds?
  • Derek Anthony Wood and the Sydney River McDonald’s Murders

© 2004–2023 ChristopherDiArmani.com | All Rights Reserved

Close

Buy me a cup of coffee

A ridiculous amount of coffee was consumed in the process of writing these articles. If you enjoy my work, please buy me a coffee or two to keep me going!