What the trial for an Ontario couple has heard so far from woman co-accused of killing boy, torturing brother

WARNING: This story details allegations of child abuse and sexual abuse.

Testimony in the trial for an Ontario couple charged in the death of one boy and what the Crown has alleged was the torture of his brother in their care is set to wrap up this week with co-accused Becky Hamber returning to the witness box.

Hamber has already faced four days of questioning from her and her wife Brandy Cooney's lawyers and the Crown. Since Jan. 12, Hamber has answered questions about how the couple treated the boys, while maintaining she loved and did nothing to harm them as they were going through the adoption process.

Last month, Cooney also testified over several days. The couple had been trying to adopt two brothers before one was found dead in the basement of their Burlington home.

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.

Hamber, 46, and Cooney, 44, 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 Milton Superior Court, is before Justice Clayton Conlan.

The Crown has argued that Hamber and Cooney abused and neglected the brothers, who had been living with the couple for about five years after being with foster parents in Ottawa.

The trial has heard paramedics found L.L. unresponsive, soaking wet and lying on the basement floor of his bedroom, which was locked from the outside. Witnesses said he was so severely malnourished and emaciated that he looked as if he could be six years old, even though he was twice that age. He died shortly after in hospital. 

A central question throughout the proceedings has been why L.L. was so severely malnourished in the last year of his life. A pathologist previously told court that malnourishment could’ve caused or contributed to his death.

Cooney and Hamber have both testified they didn't withhold food as punishment.

During Hamber's testimony on Monday, the Crown played a video from August 2021 showing L.L., wearing a wetsuit and red mittens, and crying while repeatedly asking for food, saying, “It’s not fair. I’m hungry.”

The Crown told court the video showed the boy was extremely thin and while he was standing at the top of a staircase, the bones of his neck could be seen. Hamber said she didn't notice that and wasn't worried because his weight tended to fluctuate.

Hamber has said she did not think L.L. was at risk, and noted she was working to get him into an Oakville eating disorders clinic. 

Crown lawyer Kelli Frew has questioned why Hamber was so focused on a particular clinic and noted L.L. had been accepted into an eating disorder therapy program in the fall of 2022, but Hamber declined it.

Hamber said that based on her research at the time, she thought she was doing the right thing.

She said she always fed L.L. enough and blamed his weight on an eating disorder for which he did not have any formal diagnosis. 

Texts referenced boy as 'loser' and 'it'

Other prominent evidence raised throughout the trial have been texts between the two women, with many under scrutiny for the way the boys were referenced.

Hamber testified her texted comments — such as "Drown em in their poo" and "Is it wrong to want my child to leave?" — came from frustration, not hate. 

Deleted text conversations recovered by police from the women's electronic devices show Cooney and Hamber referring to L.L. and J.L. as “f—face,” “loser” and “it.”

Hamber said she was "deeply, deeply" ashamed of messages she said were written out of dark humour and frustration and exchanged nearly every day for years.

"I can’t believe I let myself do that. I’m disgusted with myself," Hamber said, adding she’d lost a lot of sleep since those messages came up in the trial.

Hamber justifies dressing boys in wetsuits

Hamber and Cooney would lock the children in their rooms overnight, for up to 18 hours, and use zip ties to restrain them in wetsuits, sleep sacks and hockey helmets, the Crown has said.

She said while techniques such as dressing the children in zip-tied wetsuits may have been unconventional, they were necessary for safety and the Children's Aid Society (CAS) knew about most of them.

While she was at times uncomfortable having to restrain the boys, Hamber said, it was necessary to prevent them from harming themselves or others and from causing property damage. 

When asked by Frew why she used zip-ties, Hamber said neither boy ever complained about it and she was trying to prevent them from strangling themselves with their clothes. She also likened being put in a wetsuit to giving a “hug.”

Frew presented a counter-narrative, reading text messages between Hamber and Cooney in which they discussed how wetsuits could “seal him in,” in reference to L.L. Frew said they used the wetsuits to make it easier to clean up if the boy peed himself during the night. 

Hamber denied that, saying zip-tying the wetsuits were to stop the boys from peeing in places they shouldn’t, and in L.L.'s case, harming his genitals with excessive masturbation. 

Were boys' tantrums exaggerated by accused?

Hamber expressed several times how the boys would have explosive tantrums. She said they caused tens of thousands of dollars in property damage and injured her multiple times, including breaking her arm and fingers.

The Crown cast doubt on that narrative, with lawyer Kelli Frew questioning why Hamber didn't get an X-ray to diagnose the broken arm and why it appeared she didn't document it or other injuries she listed in court.

Hamber said she was too busy caring for L.L. and J.L. to seek medical attention for herself, besides one visit to an urgent care centre.

Frew also accused Hamber of misrepresenting various things, contending she “grossly exaggerated the length, degree and duration of the so-called tantrums the boys would have” —which Hamber denied. 

Judge asks why Hamber didn't try to return kids

As Hamber's defence lawyer, Monte MacGregor, questioned her last week, the judge interjected to ask Hamber why she didn’t try to return the boys to the CAS.

"We loved our kids," Hamber answered. "We did not want to give up on them." 

She also said although she no longer believes the children were sexually abused, that fear influenced her too.

At the time, CAS and police investigated and deemed the boys’ sexual abuse claims unfounded. J.L. has testified the women instructed him and L.L. to make false allegations, a claim the defence has rejected.   

Hamber is set to return to the witness box both Thursday and Friday, when proceedings are expected to wrap up before final arguments are set to be presented in March. CBC will continue its live coverage of the trial on both those days, beginning before court resumes at 9 a.m. ET.

If you’re affected by this report, you can look for mental health support through resources in your province or territory. 

If you’re in immediate danger or fear for your safety or that of others around you, please call 911. For support in your area, you can look for crisis lines and local services via the Ending Sexual Violence Association of Canada database. ​​

Here are some other help resources:

• Canada’s Suicide Crisis Helpline: Call or text 988.
• Kids Help Phone: 1-800-668-6868. Text 686868. Live chat counselling on the website.
• Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention: Search by province or territory for suicide crisis services, suicide bereavement and mental health support.