Lawyer says no proof of his client was present when B.C. couple was killed

ABBOTSFORD — One of three men accused of killing an Abbotsford, B.C., couple has conceded that evidence against him shows he knew of the planned home invasion that resulted in their deaths — but his lawyer says the prosecution hasn’t proven his client was at the crime scene.

Andrew Cochrane, a lawyer for Abhijeet Singh, told B.C. Supreme Court Justice Brenda Brown in closing submissions on Monday that the Crown is relying on a “single item” of physical evidence to prove his client’s involvement in the robbery and killings of Arnold and Joanne De Jong in May 2022.

Cochrane said his client admits to a “degree of moral culpability,” given the evidence against him.

“He accepts that the evidence may establish that he had advanced knowledge of the planned home invasion, that he may be found to have been a party to the break-in and robbery, and that he received stolen property in his aftermath,” Cochrane said. “We don’t invite the court to ignore this evidence or the responsibility that it may attract.”

But Cochrane said the Crown can’t prove a charge of murder against Singh, claiming the limitations on the physical evidence are “fatal” to the case against him.

Singh, Khushveer Toor and Gurkaran Singh are accused of breaking into the De Jongs’ home, tying them up and killing them as part of a robbery plot motivated by debt and greed. They are charged with first-degree murder.

Prosecutors allege the men jointly plotted to rob and kill the couple, then stole credit cards, cheques and a power washer from the home, which they had previously visited while working for Abhijeet Singh’s cleaning company.

Cochrane said his client’s DNA was found on rope used to tie up the victims, but he had bought the rope and other items the day before.

He said the simplest explanation for Singh’s DNA on the rope was that it was deposited when he purchased it.

Cochrane said his client’s phone was more than 50 kilometres away from the scene during the “window of opportunity” identified by the Crown for the crime to have occurred.

“It remains uncertain as to who was present at the scene, how many people were present,” he said. “I emphasize that because there’s an assumption running through the Crown submissions that there must have been three people.”

He said the evidence only shows his client was involved in “preparation and assistance” with the home invasion, but there is nothing to show that he likely foresaw Arnold and Joanne De Jong’s deaths.

Cochrane told the judge that the “highest finding available” to her is manslaughter.

“Speculation cannot support a murder conviction,” he said.

The Crown’s closing submissions on Friday highlighted how investigators uncovered a large body of circumstantial evidence against the men, including DNA samples, financial records and phone records.

Crown attorney William Dorsey said Abhijeet Singh had conducted “exceptionally damning” internet searches after the deaths were reported in the media, including asking what the punishment was for murder in Canada.

After Cochrane completed his closing, a lawyer for Khushveer Toor criticized the DNA evidence presented at trial.

Julia Hung’s submissions raised “interpretation and reliability issues” with how a police laboratory handled a DNA sample, highlighting criticisms from an expert witness who testified earlier in the trial for the defence.

Closing submissions in the trial, which is by judge alone, are set to conclude Tuesday.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 9, 2026.

Darryl Greer, The Canadian Press