Listen to this article
Estimated 4 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
Defence lawyers fighting the extradition of a Calgary man who is accused of working for alleged cartel kingpin Ryan Wedding say he should not be sent to the U.S. to face charges for alleged crimes that took place in Canada and doing so amounts to “cherry picking” the jurisdiction with the stiffer punishments.
“It’s almost a 51st state argument when you say, ‘Oh we’ll just give the United States the authority to conduct a trial of our citizens in its country,’” said lawyer Noel O’Brien.
Allistair Chapman was arrested a year ago on extradition warrants alongside seven other Canadians allegedly working with Wedding, who is accused of running a Mexico-based billion-dollar drug trafficking ring before he was taken into custody in January.
Chapman faces a charge of conspiracy to murder.
‘Clear jurisdiction’
On Thursday, a two-day hearing before Court of King’s Bench Justice Darren Reed got underway with Chapman’s lawyers asking for a number of documents and other information they say they’re entitled to.
This includes details from a parallel RCMP investigation into Chapman that did not result in charges here in Canada which, O’Brien argued, “has clear jurisdiction.”
“An inference to be drawn is that either the RCMP concluded that the evidence did not support the charge of conspiracy to murder against Chapman, or the police authorities ‘cherry picked’ the jurisdiction that would likely result in the greatest punishment,” said O’Brien.
O’Brien told the judge that none of the alleged criminal conduct took place outside of Canada, so it would be an abuse of process to send Chapman to the U.S. to face charges.
“All of a sudden sovereignty is abdicated for the purpose of having a trial in a foreign jurisdiction such as the United States,” said O’Brien.
Authorities ‘withholding’ evidence
The defence team, which includes lawyers Gavin Wolch and Chad Haggerty, also argued Thursday that the U.S. government is “withholding” evidence.
The only disclosure provided to Chapman’s lawyers is a record of the case (ROC), a document prepared by American authorities, which outlines the allegations that justify extradition and prosecution.
The ROC applies to all eight Canadians arrested in the Wedding investigation, and Chapman’s lawyers pointed out that only one paragraph in the 46-page document ties Chapman to his charge.
That paragraph does not name the murder victim or a person identified as CW (a co-operating witness).
FBI informant shot in head
Although court records and media reports identify the murder victim and Chapman’s alleged co-conspirators, the attorney general, representing the U.S. government, has not provided those details to the defence, a fact O’Brien called “absurd.”
“One gets the impression that the attorney general says ‘no’ to everything; ‘You can have nothing,’” said O’Brien.
“Witness A,” as he is identified in the ROC, is in fact Jonathan Acebedo Garcia, an FBI informant and would-be key witness for U.S. prosecutors, who was shot in the head while dining at a restaurant in Colombia in January 2025.
American authorities allege Chapman helped arrange the killing by providing Acebedo Garcia’s photo to a co-accused and paying for it to be posted online.
Co-operating witness ‘unreliable’
Not only do Chapman’s lawyers want the government to name the victim, they also want information about the person identified in the ROC as CW.
The defence believes CW is Andrew Clark, Wedding’s former right-hand man, and that his evidence against Chapman is “manifestly unreliable.”
The hearing continues Friday with arguments from lawyers for the Department of Justice regarding the disclosure issue.
A date for Chapman’s extradition hearing has not been set. He remains in custody, having been denied bail twice.
