Ontario Women Found Guilty of Killing 12-Year-Old Boy in Their Care, Torturing His Brother

Two Ontario women have been found guilty on all counts related to the murder of a 12-year-old boy and the torture of his younger brother while the children were in their custody.

Burlington, Ont., couple Brandy Cooney and Becky Hamber have been found guilty of  first-degree murder for the 2022 death of a boy named in court documents as L.L., whom they were in the process of adopting.

The women were also found guilty of assault with a weapon, forcible confinement, and failing to provide essential care for L.L.’s younger brother, named as J.L. A publication ban is in place to protect the identity of the indigenous brothers who had been in the care of Hamber and Cooney since 2017.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Clayton Conlan did not read out the reasons for his decision during the May 5 hearing and spoke only briefly to the court.

“Both Ms. Cooney and Hamber are found guilty on all counts,” Conlan said, noting that his reasons for the guilty verdict are contained in a nearly 300-page court document that would later be released to the media.

A number of disturbing allegations emerged during the judge-only trial that began last September at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Milton, Ont. Closing arguments wrapped up in March and the judge announced last month he would render his verdict on May 5.

The court heard during the trial that L.L. was 12 when he was found unresponsive, soaking wet, and covered in vomit in Cooney and Hamber’s Burlington home on Dec. 21, 2022.

Crown attorney Monica MacKenzie told the court L.L. was so severely emaciated he was the size of a six-year-old. He was later pronounced dead, potentially due to hypothermia or cardiac arrest caused by extreme malnourishment, a pathologist testified, but told the court the exact cause of death was still uncertain.

Conlan said in his decision, which was obtained by CBC, that the couple acted with an intent to kill L.L., noting that their actions had caused the boy to “waste away into nothing.”

The failure of either woman to supply the boy with proper nutrition and medical attention, despite seeing the result of their actions and inactions “demonstrates an intention to kill,” Conlan said.

Accusations and Conclusions

Cooney and Hamber were accused by the Crown of despising the boy, saying he was “deprived and abused” before his death.

Defence counsel argued that the women loved both boys and never intended for L.L. to die. They said the pair had sought medical treatment for the boy as his health worsened.

The judge refuted that claim in his decision, saying that parents who love a child would not speak about him in a dehumanizing way.

Conlan described a Dec. 28, 2020, audio recording played in court of the women berating L.L. as “difficult to listen to,” and also referenced text messages between the couple in which they called the children derogatory names including “douche,” “loser,” and “moron” as well as other more vulgar words.

“I find that these disgusting labels for the children were habitually used by both accused because they hated the boys,” Conlan wrote. “They loathed them. They deeply resented them having come into their lives and not having turned out to be what was expected.”

The judge also referenced search histories found by investigators on the women’s devices that revealed queries regarding the deletion of camera footage and phone photographs, along with efforts to erase text messages, shortly after L.L.’s death. Police also found internet searches that contained the words “murder” and “manslaughter.”

“This court will never be convinced that a parent who loses a child to the effects of some disease, or accident or eating disorder, as alleged by these accused, would choose to spend her time grieving that unbearable loss by searching on the internet terminology about homicide,” the judge wrote. “That is especially so when that same parent, Ms. Cooney, is busy looking up on the internet how to erase footage on cameras.”

The Crown told the court the women locked the kitchen cupboard doors and regulated the timing, location, and quantity of the boys’ meals. She said both women neglected the boys’ needs and presented text messages exchanged between the women as proof. One message from Cooney asked, “Can I just not feed at all?” to which Hamber replied, “No food unless calm.”

The women denied starving the boys and said they both always received enough to eat, but the  judge said in his decision it was clear food was withheld as a punishment

Defence lawyers argued L.L’s weight loss stemmed from a rumination eating disorder and that he died from complications related to that condition. Rumination syndrome is a rare gastrointestinal disorder where recently eaten food is involuntarily regurgitated.

But Conlan also disputed that, saying the couple’s evidence about the alleged disorder was “not credible.”

He said the disorder would have had to begin prior to what the couple claimed in order for it to have the effect it did. He added that it was “nonsensical” for Cooney to imply that L.L.’s emaciated frame was due to “his temper tantrums and the caloric burn that would have been associated with them.”

The judge also addressed the allegations that the women forced the boys to wear wet suits and hockey helmets that were zip-tied in place.

Cooney acknowledged restraining the boys during her testimony, but said this was because the children had caused injuries to her and Hamber, and posed a risk of self-harm, such as hitting their heads on hard surfaces. She also said the children urinated and defecated indiscriminately and caused $60,000 worth of damage to their home.

J.L., now 14, testified via video conference last fall that he was forced to wear a wetsuit to prevent him from urinating on the walls of his bedroom, something he was adamant he had never done.

He said he was forced to sleep in a tent while dressed in a wetsuit with a onesie over it, all held together with zip-ties. He then had a “sleep sack” on top, which was secured with buttons and more zip-ties.

Some of the “consequences” for what the foster moms considered bad behaviour included forcing the boys to climb the stairs repeatedly, sometimes all afternoon, according to J.L.’s testimony. Other exercises like jumping jacks and burpees were also used as punishment, he said.

Conlan said he believed J.L.’s testimony over those given by the women. “I believe J.’s evidence on the key points of the abuse that he and L. suffered at the hands of the accused,” the judge wrote.

The judge said there was “overwhelming” evidence that J.L. was abused, noting in his decision that the couple used zip ties as a weapon. He also wrote there was no valid reason to confine the child to his room for long periods or to withhold food.

“The conduct of the accused was done out of ill will towards their child and out of malice, and to punish and deprive their child,” he wrote.

Children’s Aid Society (CAS) removed J.L. from the home after his brother’s death and he has since been reunited with his birth mother.

In a statement emailed by her lawyer, the boys’ mother described the boys as “amazing, funny and intelligent human beings with bigger than life personalities.”

“I want people to understand that we are not just a case or a story,” she wrote. “We are real people, a family who has lived through heartbreak. They are innocent children who deserved to be loved, to be protected and feel safe.”

Defence Response

Defence lawyer Monte MacGregor, who represents Hamber, spoke to reporters outside the court after hearing the verdict.

He said he was “a little bit surprised” that the first-degree murder charge was allowed to stand.

“Our client is obviously disappointed, her assertion is that she loved both of these boys and committed her entire life to them,” he said. “She’s looking at the rest of her life in jail potentially for somebody who, if you talked to her, she would say, ‘I loved this boy more than anybody I’ve ever had in my life.’”

He said he would look for any appeal options after reading Conlan’s decision.

Cooney’s attorney, Kim Edward, declined to comment on the judge’s ruling.

Cooney, 44, and Hamber, 46, are expected to appear in court later this month for sentencing.