Man found guilty in killing of Winnipeg teen

A jury has found a young Winnipeg man guilty of second-degree murder in the death of 17-year-old Phil Haiart, killed by a gunshoton a city street inOctober 2005.

Haiart was killed and another man injured when they inadvertently walked into a gang-related turf war on a street in Winnipeg's West End neighbourhood in October 2005.

After nearly a day of deliberations, the jury delivered guilty verdicts on four charges: one charge of second-degree murder and three charges of attempted murder.

The accused, who by law cannot be named because he was a minor at the time of the shooting, was acquitted of three counts of discharging a firearm.

The family of the convicted man sighed audibly in court and several members began sobbing. Haiart's parents were also in the courtroom for the verdict.

The convicted man's lawyer, Jeff Nichols, asked the court to poll the jury on the murder conviction. Each juror stood, and one by one, signalled a unanimous verdict.

Opposite of result at co-accused's trial

The verdict is an almostcomplete reversal ofa trial several weeks ago in connection withthe same shooting.

Jeffrey Cansanay, 21, was acquitted in Aprilof second-degree murder and attempted murder after two witnesses refused to testify at his trial, and the judge refused to allow their videotaped statements to police into evidence.

In the case of the current accused, three witnesses refused to swear an oath and testify during the trial.

Queen's Bench Justice Albert Clearwater allowed videotaped statements the three gave to police to be played. The statements were givenshortly after the shooting of Haiart and another man who was with Haiart, but later recovered from his injuries.

After theyrefused to testify, Clearwater convicted Jammal Jacob, Cory Amyotte and Gharib Abdullah of contempt of court. Jacob was immediately sentenced to three years in prison. Amyotte and Abdullah have yet to be sentenced.

An appeal of the earlier acquittal of Cansanay has already been launched; it could result in another trial and a chance for the jury to see the videotaped statements.

It's notyet knownif the man convictedThursdayplans toappeal the verdict.

He won't be sentenced until the judge has heard recommendations from both Crown and defence attorneys in the case.