Thread by @alysanmati

Woodside said Minassian did say he wanted to kill more women, though he knew it would be random.

Defence: He saw the group of people at Yonge and Finch and started the attack.

Woodside: He thought 20 kills would be high.

Defence: We don't know when he was thinking that

Woodside said it was part of his account of what he was thinking at the time. Doesn't think he prompted it with a question.

Defence: He was in the second lane from the right. When the light turned green he "floored it" and drove into the people.

Defence: That was a split second decision. The decision to start in that place was a split second.

Woodside agrees.

Defence: Unlike the main plan which he had days, weeks, year to think about, the decision to actually drive on the sidewalk was made "almost instantly."

Woodside agreed.

Defence: He told you there was a young man and young woman in the group.

Woodside: Took from his comments he saw 5 but he mentioned two younger people.

Defence: At that moment as he makes his "momentary decision" he is not thinking about theoretical people.

He is thinking about five people he wants to kill in that moment. The people are not nameless and faceless. He has put faces to them. He makes the decision to hit them and right after that to hit another group of people. He describes that clinically, without emotion.

Defence: He doesn't say he hurt them. He says "he heard a thud." He says everything changed, because what he's done is against the law. Said he wasn't thinking. "Wanted more, was going to continue until he was stopped."

Defence: He said he stopped, "panicked" because a drink splashed on his windshield because he can't see. Not because of the people he has hurt. That was what most concerning, that he could hit a pole and that would stop him. No talk about moral struggles.

He did it so quickly that he initially forgot to post the message on Facebook

Defence: The decision to actually do this was made in a split-second when he was in the wrong lane at Yonge and Finch.

Woodside: That's that moment he makes an irrevocable choice, he'd decided he wanted to do it. He decides he can begin at Yonge and Finch.

Defence: He said he "allowed the van to strike the victims" in the police interview.

Woodside: He says he might as well now.

Defence: Because that decision was made so quickly, regardless of earlier thoughts, his ASD meant he could not take the perspective of the people he saw and knew he was about to kill.

Woodside: Don't agree.

He thought about it for long time, had time to think about the impact. it was an ego-centric act.

Defence: So says the person who hasn't done research on autism spectrum disorder.

Judge: More of a comment than a question.

Done for the day (I always forget to say). Back tomorrow, but cross is likely over. Expect to get to closing arguments at the end of the week