THE APPEAL REQUEST TO THE CROWN
READ READ READ SHARE SHARE SHARE
“The fight isn’t over. Appealing to the Crown to correct the record.”
To: ‘Caputo, Matthew (MAG)’ Matthew.Caputo@ontario.ca; ‘brigettegraham’ brigettegraham@shaw.ca
Cc: ‘Mike Pavoni’ m.pavoni@ssmps.org; ‘Alison Campbell’ a.campbell@ssmps.org; ‘Mitchell, Heidi (MAG)’ Heidi.Mitchell@ontario.ca; ‘VirtualCrownAlgoma@ontario.ca’ VirtualCrownAlgoma@ontario.ca; ‘terry.sheehan@parl.gc.ca’ terry.sheehan@parl.gc.ca; ‘cscott@ola.org’ cscott@ola.org; ‘vwap.cao@ontario.ca’ vwap.cao@ontario.ca; ‘doug.fordco@pc.ola.org’ doug.fordco@pc.ola.org; ‘premier@ontario.ca’ premier@ontario.ca; ‘pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca’ pierre.poilievre@parl.gc.ca; ‘arpan.khanna@parl.gc.ca’ arpan.khanna@parl.gc.ca; ‘mayor.shoemaker@cityssm.on.ca’ mayor.shoemaker@cityssm.on.ca; ‘info@endviolenceeverywhere.org’ info@endviolenceeverywhere.org; ‘cait@caitalexander.com’ cait@caitalexander.com
Subject: VICTIMS OF CRIME – Urgent Request to Appeal Acquittal on First-Degree Murder Charge in R v. Montana Lewis (Victim: Sammy Graham) – Additional Evidence Concerns
Dear Crown Attorney,
We are Sam and Brigette Graham, father and mother of Sammy Graham Jr., who was tragically killed in a stabbing on November 12, 2020, in Sault Ste. Marie. I write regarding the January 30, 2026, verdict by Justice Alexander Kurke, which acquitted Montana Lewis of first-degree murder and convicted him only of manslaughter. I respectfully but urgently urge the Crown to appeal this decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal, as significant errors in the trial judge’s assessment of the evidence appear to have resulted in an incorrect finding of no specific intent to kill.
This builds on the concerns raised in my prior correspondence, including the lack of evidence for intoxication, no direct proof of an intentional knife drop, and inconsistencies between Mr. Lewis’s testimony and Semiah Lewis’s credible account. Below, I highlight additional critical details from witness testimonies, forensic evidence, and scene descriptions that contradict the judge’s interpretation and support grounds for appellate review on questions of law, unreasonable verdict, or miscarriage of justice:
1. Two Stab Wounds Indicating Greater Intent and Force
The judge described a single deliberate thrust, but forensic and testimonial evidence shows two severe stab wounds requiring significant force—one piercing the spine from front to back on the left side, and another deep through the left triceps (arm) hitting bone and severing muscle. Evidence points to both occurring during Montana Lewis’s pursuit: he chased Semiah and Sammy out the side door (Sammy holding it shut), then ran to the front, passed Semiah, and stabbed Sammy twice hard and fast face-to-face as Sammy tried to block with his leg and arm. Semiah described a jabbing motion, aligning with premeditation—not a single unintended act. This is reinforced by Mr. Lewis’s prior threatening texts (e.g., “I’m going to kill Sam — today’s the day”) and messages luring them back to the house under false pretenses about the dog. Sammy died almost instantly from massive blood loss, unable to speak or move. Downplaying this as one thrust minimizes the clear intent and violence.
2. Knife Not Intentionally Dropped in Remorse but Lost in Struggle
The judge accepted Mr. Lewis’s claim of dropping the knife as evidence of no continuing intent, but Semiah testified she did not see him drop it—only that it was on the ground after both fell during the struggle. Given the two stabs and ongoing fight, it is more reasonable that Mr. Lewis lost his grip when they collapsed (possibly knocked away by Sammy in defense). Mr. Lewis remained on top of Sammy (on his back) until Semiah pulled him off—not helping him up, as the judge suggested. This carries no implication of remorse.
3. Post-Stabbing Actions Showing No Genuine Remorse or Assistance
- An off-duty officer neighbor heard yelling “get the fuck off me” (which could not have been Sammy, as Semiah confirmed he was unresponsive and dying), consistent with Semiah pulling Mr. Lewis off.
- The officer then saw Mr. Lewis and a dog exit to the front—contradicting any portrayal of horror or helpfulness.
- Mr. Lewis instructed Semiah to turn Sammy on his back (claiming to limit blood loss), but Semiah testified Sammy was already on his back; Mr. Lewis did not perform this himself.
- His apology was only to Semiah (“I’m sorry, I love you”), with no remorse expressed for Sammy—consistent with his lack of remorse toward my son, my wife, or me over the past five years.
- After walking away, Mr. Lewis called others saying he was “going away for a long time,” then merely pointed toward the back when police arrived (drawing attention to Semiah’s screams) rather than providing active help. Officers noted he was not assisting.
4. Inconsistencies in Judicial Reasoning and Fairness Concerns
The judge rejected much of Mr. Lewis’s testimony (e.g., self-defense, reflex action) as not credible yet selectively accepted uncorroborated elements (e.g., intoxication without supporting evidence, intentional drop) while minimizing Semiah’s consistent account. This selective approach raises concerns about fair evidence weighing, potentially violating principles under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (fair trial rights). The verdict’s acknowledgment of “high culpability close to murder” underscores the flawed intent finding and erodes public trust.
As Sammy’s parents, we have endured this nightmare for over five years. The evidence overwhelmingly supports a planned, vengeful attack amounting to first-degree murder, not manslaughter. An appeal is vital to correct this apparent miscarriage of justice.
Under the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, we have the right to timely information on proceedings and to convey our views on decisions affecting us. We have engaged the Victim/Witness Assistance Program and respectfully request:
- Immediate confirmation of receipt and whether the Crown intends to pursue an appeal.
- An update on the status, given the strict 30-day timeline for the Crown to serve a notice of appeal from the acquittal (under the Criminal Code and Ontario Court of Appeal Rules—time is critically short).
- Guidance on providing any further supporting materials.
Please treat this with the utmost urgency—the appeal window is closing rapidly, and further delay risks irreparable injustice. My family and community look to the Crown to act decisively to restore faith in the system.
I am available at 705-971-8794 or this email. Thank you for your immediate attention and dedication to justice for Sammy.
Sincerely,
Sam & Brigette Graham
Father and Mother of Sammy Graham Jr.
705-971-8794
#justiceforsammyjr #endviolenceeverywhere #JudgeMisconduct #CourtComplaint #RoyalPrerogativeOfMercy #Clemency #CanadaJustice #helpforjustice #VictimsofCrime #God #GodBless #GodsPlan #police #help