Justice Terry Schultes must now decide if Kaiden Mintenko is guilty of murdering a 17-year-old boy he stabbed on a Surrey bus last year or if he's guilty instead of the lesser included crime of manslaughter.

Schultes set Jan. 9 for a fix-date hearing to determine when he'll deliver his verdict. Closing arguments were concluded on Dec. 19 following a 10-day trial.

Mintenko will appear by video.

"I'm keenly aware that the accused is in custody and everyone concerned would like the matter decided as soon as reasonably possible," Schultes said. "I want it to be a day when obviously everyone who's been involved in the case can be present."

Crown prosecutor Rod Flannigan during his final submissions on Dec. 19 said the accused murderer is "a lot more shrewd" than his defence lawyer portrayed him to be. "He is aware of the jeopardy he is in and he is willing to lie to protect himself."

Mintenko, 21, of Burnaby pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder in the April 11, 2023 stabbing of a 17-year-old boy on a Surrey bus at the outset of his with Schultes presiding in B.C. Supreme Court in New Westminster.

"Basically our position is Mr. Mintenko was aware of what he was facing, the consequence, he initially lied to police and only started to give information as evidence was shown to him and he really didn't start to admit things until he felt he was caught, but even then he held things back," Flanagan told Schultes.

The victim was stabbed in the right upper chest while riding on a Route 503 bus in the 9900-block of King George Boulevard and died in hospital. Schultes imposed publication bans on information that would identify the teen and two Crown witnesses. He also ordered a publication ban on the identity of a fourth person. 

Mintenko did not testify.

Flannigan acknowledged during his final submissions on Dec. 19 that there is a high burden on the Crown to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but it's not impossible. "Our argument is that when the court looks at the totality of the facts in this case and applies the law to them, the court can find beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Mintenko had the requisite intent for murder."

"This was not a fight, this was an unprovoked attack on a defenceless person," Flannigan said.

"He sucker-punched him and I think from watching the video (from the bus), it's hard," Flannigan said. "And he proceeded to punch him six times with a closed fist, knocking him to the floor of the bus. And then he pulls out the knife from his right side 91ÂãÁÄÊÓƵ“ and you watch it on the video 91ÂãÁÄÊÓƵ“ that arm goes up, and you can see it's a long knife, and it goes down, and it goes into (the victim's) chest."

"And he's not a novice with knives."

The trial heard when police searched Mintenko's bedroom they found stab holes in his wall, pillow and mattress.

"All we know is that there's a massive number of stab holes in his bedding, which the Crown says shows he is familiar with what a knife does when you stab something."

Police did not find the knife.

"Getting rid of the knife really goes to his, we say, his shrewdness, aware of the consequences," Flannigan said.

The Crown prosecutor recalled one bus passenger saying it looked like a chef's knife "for chopping," about 10 inches long and two inches wide. The bus driver, Flannigan added, "just described it as a big knife; he said it was almost a foot long."

"This was a big knife," Flannigan said.

Flannigan noted there were 37 passengers on the bus, not counting the driver. The victim was attacked while standing behind the driver. Flannigan noted much blood was spilled, dripping out the middle doors.

"What's important is this knife passed through the bone of the third rib," Flannigan said.

"This was a forceful blow."

Defence lawyer Mark Swartz completed his final submissions on Dec. 18. During his , Swartz argued that the Crown hadn't proven its case for a murder conviction and his client should instead be found guilty of manslaughter.

"The position of the defence has been clear at the outset of these proceedings that this is not a situation that the Crown is able to prove the requisite intent for murder and the court should find Mr. Mintenko not guilty of second-degree murder but guilty of the lesser included offence of manslaughter," Swartz told Schultes.

"The requirement is the Crown must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Mintenko either meant to cause death or he means to cause bodily harm where he knows that it's likely to cause death and is reckless whether death ensues or not."

Swartz noted the intent required for a murder conviction is that Mintenko himself had the subjective foresight that death would occur, "and it's not looked at that the accused knew it could cause death but the accused knew that the injury is likely to cause death.

"Likely to cause death is meant to convey the notion of a substantial or real chance, as distinct from a mere possibility, and that it is not sufficient for the Crown to established that the accused foresaw only a danger of death," he argued. 

The trial heard that Mintenko admitted to police that he killed the teen but had also sobbed to the officers "he wasn't supposed to die, I didn't want it at all, I didn't want to kill him, I didn't want to, I wasn't trying to."

When a police officer then asked Mintenko what he thought was going to happen then, Mintenko replied, "I wasn't thinking."

A forensic pathologist testified a knife with a single edge was thrust 17 centimetres (6.69 inches) into the victim, through the hardest bony part of his third rib into his right lung, damaging his pulmonary artery and pulmonary vein.

Swartz noted in his final submissions that Mintenko told the police, "I just, I mean like, it wasn't supposed to go that deep either."

The defence lawyer pondered why someone who intends to kill someone with a knife on a bus would try to start a fist fight first? 

He said the problem is that "if it's your intent to kill at the outset and you start with a fist fight, is that you're on a bus with a number of passengers. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that some point someone may intervene in terms of a fist fight amongst two young persons. And so your goal of carrying through with a murder is subject to failure if there's intervention."

Swartz told the judge Mintenko acted impulsively and this, along with his consumption of alcohol and marijuana, his "youthfulness whereas his frontal lobes which involve the decision-making processes are not fully developed, his reduced of maturity and lack of life experience" and Mintenko's developmental and cognitive problems should lead him to find a reasonable doubt as to his client being guilty of murder. 

"This clearly was impulsive in nature, not well thought out," the defence argued.