Couple Accused of Murdering Foster Child Referred to Themselves as His Jailer and Worried About Going to Jail in Texts

On 27 March 2025, the trial of Canadian couple Becky Hamber and Brandy Cooney reached a pivotal moment with the conclusion of closing arguments in a case concerning the death of a 12-year-old boy they were in the process of adopting. Both women, aged 46 and 44 respectively, face charges including first-degree murder related to the tragic incident that unfolded in December 2022.

The child, who is referred to in court as L.L., was discovered deceased in a basement bedroom of Hamber and Cooney’s Burlington, Ontario home. At the time of his passing, L.L. weighed just 48 pounds, raising alarm about the conditions in which he had lived. The investigation into the couple’s treatment of both L.L. and his younger brother, dubbed J.L. for the trial, commenced after J.L. reported severe maltreatment to the police. He claimed that both he and L.L. had been subjected to forms of restraint, including being tied up with zip ties, as well as being confined to their rooms for prolonged periods.

Hamber and Cooney are not only charged with murder but also face additional allegations of confinement, assault with a weapon, and failing to provide basic necessities for thechildren. The revelations regarding their alleged treatment of the boys have drawn intense scrutiny in the courtroom, particularly as details emerged from 8,000 pages of text messages exchanged between the two women.

During the trial, Crown prosecutors Kelli Frew and Monica MacKenzie highlighted these messages as crucial evidence. In a disturbing message from November 2022, Cooney expressed her fears that L.L. was “dying,” stating, “Unfortunately my thoughts [are] he is suddenly going to die and I’m going to jail.” The messages also contained references to the boys’ living conditions, where they were mockingly referred to as being held in what was termed the “Hamber Cooney prison,” indicating the couple’s awareness of the grim situation they were allegedly fostering.

Details about the lengths the women went to in monitoring the boys were also unveiled. Reportedly, cameras were installed in the children’s bedrooms, allowing the couple to keep a close watch on them. J.L.’s testimony painted a picture of a household filled with fear and isolation. He recounted instances where he and L.L. were left in their rooms for hours on end, reinforcing the idea that they were prisoners in their own home.

Hamber’s defence lawyer, Monte MacGregor, addressed the contentious text messages during closing statements. He argued that while the messages revealed an unsettling perspective, they reflected “dark humour and frustration, not hate.” MacGregor contended that, although some of the women’s actions might be seen as questionable, such behaviour should not automatically equate to murder charges.

The prosecution has argued that the couple’s negligence contributed to L.L.’s tragic death. Ontario’s deputy chief forensic pathologist, Dr. Michael Pickup, spoke during the trial and noted that while an official cause of death could not be ascertained, potential explanations included hypothermia and cardiac arrest as a result of malnourishment. This discovery has added a layer of complexity to the case, raising questions about the children’s health and treatment while in the couple’s care.

The narrative of abuse woven through the trial has shocked many, as it highlights not only the alleged actions of the women but also the broader implications regarding the child welfare system. Concerns have been raised about how such a tragic situation could unfold under the guise of guardianship.

Following the conclusion of arguments, Justice Clayton Conlan announced that a further court date is set for April 24, where he is expected to provide an update on his decision in the case. The timeline for a final ruling remains unclear, but the interest from the public and media continues to grow as details emerge about the boys’ harrowing experiences.

As the trial awaits its conclusion, the tragic circumstances surrounding L.L.’s death linger in the minds of many, serving as a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities faced by children in care and the importance of vigilance within adoption processes.