Nathan Gorham, KC, SJD, LLM, LLB
Partner
(416) 587-7364 | gorham@gvlaw.ca
Nathan Gorham KC is a criminal defence lawyer with offices in Toronto, Ontario and Fredericton, New Brunswick. Much of his practice is devoted to defending people charged in complex murder prosecutions, and he has successfully defended many high-profile homicide cases. Many of Mr. Gorham’s other clients are professionals (i.e. doctors, lawyers, professional athletes, business owners, teachers, nurses etc) who are charged with various offences, ranging from sexual assault to fraud and more. He also handles files for people who are wrongfully or unfairly charged with crimes but who do not possess the financial means to afford the best defence. Mr. Gorham regularly appears at all levels of trial and appeal courts in Ontario and Atlantic Canada. He also teaches as an adjunct professor at the University of New Brunswick Faculty of Law.
King’s Counsel
Mr. Gorham is part of a select group of lawyers who are Kings’s Counsel, a government appointment that recognizes extensive courtroom experience and exceptional contribution to the legal profession.
Higher education
Mr. Gorham holds a Doctorate of Juridical Science as well as a Master of Laws (the highest possible law degrees) from the University of Toronto—ranked as the No. 1 law school in Canada and within the Top 20 best law schools globally.
Born and raised in New Brunswick, Mr. Gorham attended undergraduate studies at St. Francis Xavier University. He was named Academic All-Canadian—a national intercollegiate varsity sport award for achieving academic excellence while playing varsity football with the X-Men. He was later inducted in the St. Francis Xavier Hall of Fame as a member of the 1996 X-Men football team.
in 2001, Mr. Gorham chose to attend law school at Queen’s University, in Kingston, Ontario so that he could play football for the Golden Gaels. He was again named Academic All-Canadian. He graduated in 2003 with the law school’s award for the highest overall performance in criminal law courses.
In 2015, Mr. Gorham obtained his Master of Laws from the University of Toronto followed by the Doctor of Juridical Science in 2022. He is currently one of the very few practicing lawyers who hold such a degree.
BOOK A CONSULTATION
Toronto: (416) 587-7364 | Atlantic Canada: (506) 644-8714 | gorham@gvlaw.ca
Teaching, speaking, writing
Mr. Gorham is an adjunct professor at the University of New Brunswick, Faculty of Law, where he teaches the law of homicide (murder) with an emphasis on preventing wrongful convictions. He frequently speaks at law conferences, and he has published on a range of topics ranging from preventing wrongful convictions to drug offences.
High Profile Cases
Mr. Gorham focuses much of his law practice on the defence of extremely serious and trials and appeals, cases involving allegations of murder, sexual assault, gun and drug offences, as well as others. Such cases often involve complex expert evidence. They also present unique challenges for defence counsel on account of the resources devoted to case by police and prosecutors. The following are some of the high profile trials or appeals that Mr. Gorham has acted on in recent years.
Murder charge stayed after lengthy trial (2024)
In November 2024, nearly nine weeks into trial on a charge of second-degree murder, the charge was stayed against Mr. Gorham and Ms. Vandebeek’s client. The defendant had been accused of counselling/instructing a co-defendant to shoot another man at a party attended by high school students and young university students. The cross-examinations helped demonstrate the inadequacy of the police investigation and the incredibility of the prosecution’s central witness. Shortly after Mr. Gorham cross-examined that witness, the prosecution stayed the of second-degree murder, ending the case altogether for their client.
Murder charge stayed (2024)
The defendant was charged with first-degree murder following a botched robbery in a school parking lot. She was alleged to have driven the shooters to the scene of the robbery and the eventual killing. Nathan Gorham negotiated the reduction of the charge to manslaughter at the preliminary inquiry. and then a stay of the charges completely.
Murder appeal allowed, followed by time served resolution (2024)
On December 6, 2023, the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial for a man who had been convicted of second-degree murder. Nathan Gorham and Breana Vandebeek argued on appeal that the trial judge had improperly permitted witnesses to express their opinion about whether the victim was likely to die from injuries inflicted in a street fight. The defendant in this case had been found guilty at trial, represented by other counsel, before retaining Mr. Gorham to assist him on the appeal. Following the order for a new trial, Mr. Gorham negotiated a settlement that saw the prosecution drop the second-degree murder conviction for manslaughter and time served. His client was released from custody.
Manslaughter case dropped mid-trial (2023)
In March 2023, Mr. Gorham represented a man who had convicted in a previous trial of manslaughter for allegedly failing to feed his daughter properly. During cross-examination at the new manslaughter trial, Mr. Gorham impeached the evidence given by the pathologist in the earlier trial. The witness then acknowledged that the death might now have been from maltreatment at all; instead, it might have been due to undetected Vitamin D deficiency followed by a cascade of tragic inflammatory disease processes within the young girl.
First-degree murder dismissed, manslaughter resolution (2023)
In April 2023, Mr. Gorham and his partner, Breana Vandebeek, represented a man charged with first-degree murder for allegedly shooting the deceased and then burning his body. The prosecution’s theory was that the defendant and another man ambushed the deceased, shot him multiple times, and then transported his body to a remote location before burning the remains. The defendant pleaded not guilty to first-degree but acknowledged his responsibility for manslaughter through encouragement of a fight between the deceased and the other defendant. After cross-examination of several witnesses at trial, the prosecution agreed to abandon its murder prosecution in exchange for a settlement to manslaughter.
Jury acquits of first-degree murder, but convicts of manslaughter (2023)
In the Spring of 2023, a Toronto area jury returned a verdict of not guilty of first degree murder but guilty of manslaughter in a case defended by Mr. Gorham and Ms. Vandebeek. Their client was prosecuted on a theory that he stabbed his roommate in the throat repeatedly during a dispute in a rooming house before hiding his body in the crawl space of the basement and covering it with hydrochloric acid. Their client maintained that he had acted in self-defence. Following the verdict, Mr. Gorham was able to secure a sentence of time served (4 years) and his client spent no further time in custody. .
Acquitted, first degree murder (2021)
The defendant in this case was charged with first degree murder in relation to a shooting that occurred outside of a nightclub. The prosecution theorized that he had committed the killing because he was angry about perceived disrespect from inside of the club. It relied on an eye-witness who claimed that she knew the defendant and saw him shoot the deceased. Mr. Gorham was able to undermine her evidence during cross-examination, demonstrating that he was working in the criminal underworld with a dirty police officer who was robbing drug dealers and created false grounds for his search warrants (the officer was later convicted of his crimes). The trial judge found Mr. Gorham’s client not guilty of murder. .
Manslaughter charged stayed after cross-examination (2021)
Mr. Gorham acted as counsel on this manslaughter case after the court of appeal ordered a new trial following a second degree murder conviction. The defendant maintained his innocence but the prosecution prepared to call five expert witnesses, each of whom claimed that the child victim could not likely have died from household accident such as a fall in the bathtub. During the first cross-examination, the doctor admitted that he should not be providing expert evidence regarding the cause of death. The prosecution decided not to offer the next two as experts. That left two proposed expert witnesses—a neuropathologist and and forensic pathologist. After several days of cross-examination, each witness admitted that the young victim could have sustained her ultimately fatal head injury from a fall in the bathtub.
Acquitted of second-degree murder, guilty of manslaughter following trial (2021)
In the summer of 2021, Mr. Gorham acted for a client who was charged with second degree murder for his role in a shooting that took place during a break and enter of a grow operation. The prosecution alleged that the defendant and his friend broke into a warehouse to steal marijuana, before they were confronted by an individual who was protecting the grow operation. According to the witness’s evidence, Mr. Gorham’s client fired a handgun in an attempt to kill the man but accidentally missed and killed his accomplice. Mr. Gorham was able to undermine significant parts of the witness’s evidence during cross-examination. The trial judge eventually found the defendant not guilty of second-degree murder but guilty of the lesser offence of manslaughter. The defendant receive three additional years of jail time and is now out of custody.
Jury acquits of first-degree murder (2021)
The defendant in this case was charged with first degree murder based on a theory that she stabbed a woman following an argument and a fist fight. The prosecution relied on text messages and the evidence of two eye witnesses who claimed that they saw the woman burst into the apartment, chased the victim to the balcony, and then stab her in chest. Mr. Gorham was able to undermine the evidence of these witnesses during cross-examination, and his client testified that she was present but it was her co-accused who committed the stabbing. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on the first degree murder and all included counts.
Not criminally responsible on four counts of first degree murder (2020)
The defendant in this case was charged with four counts of first-degree murder in relation to two police officers and two civilians. On August 10, 2018, shortly after 7 am, he shot and killed the four individuals. Pending trial, Mr. Gorham applied to have the defendant found unfit so that he would receive involuntary anti-psychotic medication. During the trial, the defence presented evidence from forensic psychiatrists explaining that the defendant was suffering from delusions and hallucinations at the time of killings. The jury eventually found the defendant not criminally responsible.
Second degree murder appeal allowed, defendant released on time served (2019)
The defendant in this case was charged with second-degree murder after a drug deal at the Square One shopping centre in Mississauga end in a shooting. Two of the people involved in the robbery plan testified that the defendant was the one who took the gun and fired the shot. He testified in his defence, explaining that he was not present for the shooting but had loaned a car to the men who had attended for the drug deal/robbery. He was convicted at trial of second degree murder. On appeal, Mr. Gorham argued that the trial judge had erred by permitting the prosecution to introduce faulty expert evidence. The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial. Following negotiations, the prosecution offered a plea to manslaughter on the defendant’s version of the events, namely that he had aided in the robbery by loaning the car but he did not know that there would be a shooting.
Not guilty, dangerous driving causing death (2019)
The defendant in this case was charged with dangerous driving causing death following an alleged incident of street racing and intimidation. Mr. Gorham challenged the Crown witness’s in cross-examination and his client testified that he had not been chasing the victim or attempting to race. After a day of deliberations, the defence applied to have a juror removed after it came to light that the juror’s partner was friends with a family member of the deceased. The jury subsequently returned a verdict of not guilty.
Murder dismissed after exclusion of evidence (2017)
In this case, Mr. Gorham represented a client who was charged with second-degree murder based on an allegation that he pushed or kicked a two year old child in the stomach, causing internal bleeding, septic shock, and ultimately death. No witness claimed to have seen the assault. Instead, the prosecution’s theory rested upon the evidence of a forensic pathologist who claimed that the stomach injury could be caused by a punch, a kick, or some impact upon a hard unyielding object but not from a fall from his crib or any other type of household accident. Through his own medical-scientific research, Mr. Gorham was able to demonstrate, during the cross-examination of the expert, that the injury could have been caused by a short accidental fall in the home. The trial judge then excluded a substantial portion of the pathologist’s evidence and the Crown agreed to abandon its theory of second-degree murder.
Retaining Mr. Gorham
Mr. Gorham can be contacted directly at (416) 410-4814 (Toronto) or (506) 644-8714 or gorham@gvlaw.ca. Generally, he charges a flat retainer fee at the beginning of the case in order to provide an opinion regarding the individual’s legal options, his or her chances of success, as well as quote for the entire proceeding. His fees are structured like this in order to provide clients with clarity and confidence regarding not only their potential defences but also the potential costs of the proceedings. For clients who do not have the means of retaining Mr. Gorham personally, he will discuss the option of another lawyer in his firm handling the file. He also handles a number of pro bono cases were year.