“Fear caused confession to killings, Burns says.”
Sara Jean Green, Seattle Times

Sebastian Burns took the stand in his own defense yesterday, testifying that he and co-defendant Atif Rafay had nothing to do with the 1994 slayings of Rafay's parents and sister in Bellevue.

Burns told jurors he and Rafay lied to undercover Canadian police when they said they committed the homicides, testifying he was scared he'd be killed by men he thought were big-money criminals if he didn't.

Burns testified that the undercover officer "wanted an A to Z story about the crime and I didn't have an A to Z story because we didn't do it." Burns added that after giving a fake story to the officer, "... I was relaxed. I thought I was taking the safest course of action because (the officer) wasn't going to shoot me in the head."

Yesterday, after almost two months of testimony from several Royal Canadian Mounted Police witnesses — including the two undercover operators whose elaborate scenarios ultimately led to the 1995 arrest of Burns and Rafay — the state rested its case in the triple, aggravated-first-degree murder trial that took more than eight years to get to court.

Aside from Burns, who is still to be cross-examined by prosecutors, Burns' defense team has said they will call two more witnesses: the Bellevue police detective who headed the U.S. investigation and a waitress who served Burns and Rafay at a Seattle diner the night of the slayings. The detective and waitress have previously testified for the state.

Rafay's defense attorneys said yesterday they won't decide if Rafay will testify until after Burns is cross-examined. If Rafay takes the stand, he will most likely be the last witness to testify before the case is turned over to the jury.

The state contends Burns and Rafay went to dinner and a movie on July 12, 1994, to establish an alibi, but then sneaked out of the movie to commit the killings, ostensibly to cash in on inheritance money; prosecutors say the two then went to a Seattle diner as part of their alibi and returned to Bellevue to "discover" the bloody crime scene.

The defense, however, has argued the two were inside the theater when the Rafay family was bludgeoned and were later coerced by the RCMP into making false confessions.

Since the state began trying its case against Burns and Rafay in November, the jury has heard nearly five months of testimony from dozens of witnesses, seen some 500 items submitted as evidence, moved courtrooms and watched its numbers shrink with the dismissal of seven jurors, including one man who left the jury last week because of a medical problem and a woman who resigned the week before after the unexpected death of her grandson. The trial began with 12 jurors and eight alternates.

For the past several weeks, the jury has heard hours of taped conversations that are part of some 4,000 hours of audio- and videotaped surveillance captured during a five-month undercover-police operation.

The focus of testimony for almost two months, the operation — dubbed "Project Estate" by Canadian officials — is the linchpin to the state's case against the two Canadian citizens who have spent nearly nine years in jail.

Court orders in the United States and Canada prohibit publication of the first names of RCMP Sgt. Haslett and Cpl. Shinkaruk, the two lead operators whose elaborate ruses led to the arrest of Burns and Rafay in July 1995.

Haslett, the RCMP's bogus mob boss and the state's final witness, has testified that he gave Burns numerous opportunities to deny any involvement in the Bellevue killings, but Burns never did. After Haslett offered to have evidence in Bellevue destroyed, the RCMP videotaped Burns and Rafay making incriminating statements. During the last of 12 scenarios — which was also the first time Rafay met with the undercover operators — Haslett told Rafay, "I'm gonna get you out of the trouble you're in. ... You and (Burns) are so close to going to jail right now, it's (expletive) unreal."

Later, on July 19, 1995, Rafay told Haslett he didn't take part in the slayings but saw his mother die. Asked by Haslett how he felt about his role in the killings, Rafay said, "Pretty rotten, but it was tempered by the fact I thought it was necessary ... to achieve what I wanted to achieve in life. ... I think of it as a sacrifice ... as an injustice in the world that basically forced me to do this thing."

But when Burns took the stand yesterday, he said he and Rafay concocted a story to tell Haslett and Shinkaruk, gleaning details from newspaper articles and agreeing on what they should say before making fake confessions during meetings on July 18 and 19, confessions that led to their arrests on July 31, 1995.

Burns testified about his difficulties finding work and going to school after returning to Vancouver because of the publicity surrounding the Bellevue killings. When he first met Shinkaruk outside a hair salon in April 1995 in a ploy devised by the RCMP, Burns said it was the first time in a long time anyone had taken an interest in him.

"I was just giving him a drive ... and he took the time to treat me as a friend," Burns said. "... I don't imagine I've ever had someone so interested in me at any time in my life. It was certainly flattering."

That night, Shinkaruk introduced Burns to Haslett under the pretense that Haslett had the means to invest in a film Burns and Rafay wanted to make. But Burns said yesterday he didn't even have a script, and the whole film project was just a half-baked idea he boasted about to Shinkaruk. After drinking "six pints of beer" with the two, Burns gave Haslett his phone number and agreed to do "jobs" for the man Burns had already concluded was a criminal.

Later, Burns said he tried to extricate himself from Haslett's criminal web, pretending he'd found an investor who would double the film's budget.

But then the RCMP changed tack, and Haslett suggested he could use his connections to have evidence destroyed, evidence Burns said yesterday he was convinced Bellevue police were fabricating against him and Rafay.