Editor’s note: This story includes graphic descriptions of evidence that some readers may find disturbing.
“Some murders are captured on video; others, you must put the pieces together yourself to get the picture.”
The trial of Felicity Altiman, charged with second-degree murder and indignity to a body, is one in which the puzzle must be put together, said assistant Crown attorney Kaely Whillans in her closing address to the jury.
But while the murder itself took place behind closed doors, the Crown believes the evidence they offered the jury shows what took place in murder victim Robert Keskinen’s apartment during Christmas 2020 “nearly as clearly as a video.”
Whillans told the jury that 75-year-old Keskinen was stabbed more than 100 times, “and as he lay on the floor in a pool of his own blood, as he was dead or dying, Felicity Altiman cut off his scrotum and stabbed it down his throat, along with vegetables and meat placed on top like some sort of sick garnish.”
Whillans also told jurors they didn't need to consider the reason Altiman may have committed the murder, simply the facts of the case.
"You have to consider everything together," she said.
But Stephen Hinkson, defence counsel for Altiman, feels the evidence shows something quite different: in essence, not much at all.
His first and only submission to the jury as he did not offer a defence argument, Hinkson contends that Altiman stole from Keskinen, and nothing more.
That any evidence, including a fingerprint on a sunlight bottle and on the locking mechanism to the apartment door, as well as Keskinen’s blood on Altiman’s jeans, are simply the result of her taking from him, not killing him.
“You can’t go scurrying around in Bob’s apartment gathering things and not get blood on you,” Hinkson said.
As Keskinen's time of death is unclear, and happened sometime between Dec. 24 and Dec. 25, 2020, Hinkson submitted that Altiman came upon Keskinen’s already dead body and decided to steal from him.
“The reality is Felicity Altiman attended Bob Keskinen’s residence when he was already dead,” Stephen Hinkson told the jury. “Between 5 and 7 p.m. Dec. 24, Bob Keskinen was murdered, the food that he was eating was shoved down his throat.
“The food he was eating was right there on the floor. The electric frying pan he was using was right there on the floor. Who attended the apartment on the 24th of December? That’s the question you should be asking. The person who entered the apartment on the 24th is the person who killed Bob Keskinen.”
Altiman, or an unnamed third party; it will be up to the jury to decide.
Dr. Kona Williams, who performed the post-mortem examination, testified Oct. 10 that, besides the injuries to the man’s genitals, Keskinen died of multiple stab wounds: there were at least 30 stab wounds in his facial area alone, with 46 more on his back and buttocks.
The Crown theory of the crime is that Altiman went to Keskinen’s apartment hoping to steal money from his wallet. When it didn't go as planned, “she found a way to get his belongings anyway,” said Whillans. “She began to stab him over and over until he collapsed and murdered him.”
Whillans said forensic testing found that Keskinen’s was the only blood on the blood-stained items tested and Altiman’s DNA was the only other DNA found in the apartment or on the tested items, including the pair of women’s jeans found in the stairwell.
Hinkson, on the other hand, said “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury: Felicity Altiman is guilty of theft, maybe bad judgment. But, she is not guilty of murder.”
Hinkson questioned Altiman’s ability to change her clothes after the murder, noting that testimony at trial said she left to go to Keskinen’s apartment empty-handed.
He called into question testimony from two witnesses, Wayne Shabogesic and his son, Dustin Simon, who said she returned to their apartment having changed her clothes. Hinkson said that because Altiman’s belongings were in Shabogesic’s unit, testimony by Shabogesic and Simon didn’t make sense.
He told the jury, “at no point in time did she take (her) belongings out of the residence, never.”
Hinkson also submitted that any attack as violent as this one would leave marks on the hands of the assailant and no one testified that when Altiman had cuts to her hands.
There was also the question of Altiman's efforts to get rid of items that connected her to Keskinen — either obtained through theft or murder. Hinkson argued Altiman showed no urgency in getting rid of incriminating items she had, such as her clothing with blood stains on them. She only did that on Dec. 26 when she asked Matthieu Doucet to take bags to the garbage bin at the back of the building.
“There was no (immediate) attempt by Felicity Altiman to get rid of the clothing she had,” said Hinkson. “She had ample opportunity, but she didn’t think she had done anything wrong.”
Hinkson concluded that while Altiman used bad judgment on Dec. 25, 2020, she did not commit a murder.
“Should she have called police?” he asked. “I think so. Should she have stolen items from him? I don’t think so. But, that’s what she did.”
The trial continues Oct. 22 as Justice R. Dan Cornell finishes his instructions to the jury before they begin their deliberations. The jury will be sequestered during this time.
Jenny Lamothe covers court for Sudbury.com.