Article content continued

Ali’s lawyers said outside court that their client never should have faced terror charges.

Photo by Chris Young/Canadian Press

“This was a case where the Crown overreached,” defence attorney Nader Hasan said. “They had someone who they thought looked the part of the terrorist when, in reality, they had someone who committed a terrible, terrible act who is mentally ill and they should have proceeded in that fashion, rather than overreaching for terrorism.”

Ali appeared in court in the same grey suit and white, checked shirt he has worn on every day of the trial. Sitting in the accused’s box, he kept his head bowed and his hands clasped together.

He had pleaded not guilty to three counts of attempted murder, three counts of assault with a weapon, two counts of assault causing bodily harm and one count of carrying a weapon for the purpose of committing an offence, all for the benefit or at the direction of a terror organization.

This was a case where the Crown overreached

His lawyers had argued that, because he committed his actions alone and had never been in contact with any terror groups, he should be found not guilty on the terror charges and ruled “not criminally responsible” for the lesser included offences of attempted murder, assault and weapons offences — a designation that acknowledges the accused committed an offence but, as a result of a mental disorder, could not appreciate the consequences, legality or moral wrongness of their actions.

MacDonnell said he agreed with two psychiatrists who testified at trial that Ali should be found not criminally responsible for his actions.

The prosecution argued that Canadian terror laws could apply to Ali because he acted as a “terrorist group of one.”

The 2016 incident at a north Toronto military recruitment centre left at least two soldiers with minor injuries.