Defence at Ontario couple's murder trial argues boy was failed by health providers

Becky Hamber and Brandy Cooney, left wing wing and endorse from left, sit around in separate prisoner's boxes as Cooney's lawyer, Kim Edward, started closing arguments.

The court reporter for the trial of Becky Hamber and Brandy Cooney is pictured in this courtroom sketch in Milton, Ont., March 23, 2026.

Ontario's former child advocate says children's aid societies made 'bad decisions' leading up to death of boy

Closing submissions begin today in Milton, Ont., at the trial of the Burlington couple accused in the death of a 12-year-old and crimes against his younger brother.

Becky Hamber, 46, and Brandy Cooney, 44, are alleged to have abused and neglected the brothers, who had been living with the couple for about five years after the brothers were with foster parents in Ottawa.

The Indigenous boys' identities are protected under a publication ban. For our coverage, we're referring to the older boy, who was 12 when he died on Dec. 21, 2022, as L.L. And his younger brother as J.L.

The couple have pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder of L.L., as well as not guilty to confinement, assault with a weapon — zip ties — and failing to provide the necessaries of life to J.L. 

The judge-alone trial, which began in mid-September in Superior Court, is before Justice Clayton Conlan.

Over seven months, the trial has heard from dozens of witnesses, including social service workers, health professionals, educators and police. Hamber, Cooney, and J.L., now 14, also testified over multiple days. 

Evidence includes thousands of deleted text messages that police accessed, hours of audio recordings and hundreds of images, including from security cameras the women used to surveil the boys.

Witness testimony wrapped Jan. 23, with Conlan calling the trial "lengthy and difficult." Closing arguments are scheduled after today for March 27.

After closing arguments, Conlan will likely decide Cooney's and Hamber's fate sometime this spring. 

MacGregor gets loud in asking “why, why?” Dhaliwal would recommend the ER for L.L. Despite not knowing much about refeeding syndrome. 

He gestures toward Hamber, arguing again that it was the doctors, not Hamber, who failed to recognize the severity of L.L.’s condition. 

"There's too many faults with her credibility and I think you should disregard what she says," MacGregor tells Conlan.

He seems to have affected the gallery, where quiet chatter has started again.

Dhaliwhal was "lying" when she testified she kept telling the women to take L.L. To the ER, MacGregor says.

She testified she didn't know much about refeeding syndrome or what risks the child may be facing, so why would she recommend that, he wonders aloud.

Dhaliwhal, L.L.’s psychiatrist, was "evasive" at times while testifying, MacGregor contends. 

He notes Dhaliwhal maintained she told the couple to take L.L. To the ER.

If they'd listened, "We wouldn’t be going through this and the boy would be alive,” she testified in October.

Pointing to different parts of her testimony, MacGregor says the psychiatrist frequently suggested other specialists needed to make decisions or diagnoses. 

“She keeps passing the buck on what’s required.”

Conlan asks what MacGregor wants him to do with Duncan’s and Dhaliwhal's evidence.

“If I conclude actions or inactions even contributed to L.L.'s demise, that conclusion would not defeat the causation argument,” the judge puts to MacGregor, referring to the malnutrition that may have contributed to the boy’s death.

The question, MacGregor responds is whether his client intended to cause bodily harm by not feeding L.L.

Cory’s and Brown's testimonies show doctors missed the urgency of L.L.'s condition, he contends. 

The Crown argues the couple should have taken the child to the ER, but in multiple communications Hamber had with doctors before he died, health professionals did not recommend that, MacGregor says.

He says he's not blaming doctors, but is trying to show how the average person with no medical training would respond in Hamber's situation.

Court is now on a 15-minute break.

Reading through Brown's past testimony, MacGregor makes the point L.L. Should have received care urgently. 

Conlan says there's no question Brown agreed with MacGregor's assertion and said in hindsight, L.L. Should have gone to the emergency room immediately.

MacGregor turns to testimony by Dr. Alan Brown, who saw L.L. At the child and adolescent inpatient unit at Oakville Trafalgar Memorial hospital.

The lawyer contrasts Brown's testimony to Dhaliwal's, suggesting the psychiatrist also  lacked urgency and seemed not to understand what she needed to do to help L.L.

The day before L.L. Died, Hamber called Duncan's office to get information transferred to the child's psychiatrist, Dr. Shelinderjit Dhaliwal.

That's another example of her acting to protect the boy, he says.

"I feel sorry for Dr. Duncan," MacGregor says, adding the physician was honest in admitting he didn't understand the extent of L.L.'s condition. 

MacGregor is banging on the podium to emphasize his point that Dr. Duncan failed to recognize the severity of L.L.’s condition. 

It captures the gallery’s attention, adding a sense of drama to arguments

Duncan missed "the severity" of L.L.'s condition, MacGregor says, with a referral for an eating disorders clinic coming too late.

In hindsight, the lawyer says, Duncan agreed L.L. Was at risk of a cardiac incident that could have led to his death. 

He also agreed he didn't get the urgent care he needed

Pointing at Hamber, who is sitting in a prisoner’s box, MacGregor says Hamber may be "an overly critical pain in the ass" to someone caring for the boys because she looked after them.

"How is that an intent to cause bodily harm or kill?" he says. "It's not."

Hamber pushed to get L.L. Care constantly, MacGregor says. 

When she was in the witness box, the Crown questioned Hamber about that focus, suggesting she should have known L.L. Needed emergency medical care and focused on that instead. 

---

---