(Re) 1905-02103, 2020 ONCICB 14

CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BOARD

Adjudicator: Guy Savoie

Date: June 17, 2020

Indexed as: (Re) 1905-02103

DECISION

Introduction

1The Applicant applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (CICB) seeking compensation for a death resulting from a crime of violence. The Applicant is seeking a periodic award for support of the child of the Deceased.

Decision

2In accordance with the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act, RSO 1990, c.C24, as amended (CVCA), the CICB denies the Application. The reasons for this Decision follow below.

Hearing

3The hearing was conducted in writing on the basis of the materials contained in the Applicant’s file.

Evidence

4The Deceased is the biological father of the Applicant’s daughter. At the time of his death, the child was 6 months old. The Applicant informed the CIBC that she did not reside with the Deceased nor was he gainfully employed at the time of his death. This information was also confirmed by police. The Applicant was unable to provide the CICB with any documentation to establish that she was receiving any financial support for the child from the Deceased prior to his death.

5Based on the evidence of police, on the afternoon of […], the Deceased and his brother attended a barbeque party where approximately two hundred young people were socializing.

6The Deceased and his brother entered the building at the site and became involved in a confrontation with the Alleged Offenders (AOs) that escalated into some pushing, shoving, name calling and the breaking of some bottles and glasses. There was some pre-existing discord between the men that precipitated the argument. Once the participants calmed down to a degree, the AOs decided to leave the building and go to an outside area.

7The Deceased enraged by the confrontation produced a handgun. He told his friends that he was going outside to “settle the score” despite the efforts of several people who tried to convince him to stay inside.

8The Deceased left the building followed by his brother. Witnesses reported that within seconds the sound of two or three gunshots were heard followed immediately by approximately 15 more gunshots.

9During the shooting spree, the Deceased was struck in the chest area with one bullet and came back into the building where he collapsed. He died from his injuries while still at the scene.

10The AOs left the scene prior to the arrival of police. The Deceased’s brother retrieved the Deceased’s handgun and disposed of it in a nearby garbage can, along with his own pistol and then fled the scene as well.

11The Deceased’s brother changed his clothing then went to the hospital where the Deceased had been taken by ambulance. The Deceased’s brother provided the police with information as to the identity of the AOs who were subsequently arrested and charged with murder and weapons offences.

12The Deceased’s brother provided the police with several statements that included admitting that the Deceased had fired his handgun at the AOs and they returned fire however, he denied firing his own pistol. The Police also received information from other sources that indicated the Deceased had fired the first shots at the AOs immediately after exiting the building.

13The Deceased’s brother contradicted his original statement in several respects during numerous subsequent statements. The contradictory statements resulted in the charges against the AOs being withdrawn by the Crown prior to the trial.

Analysis

Crime of Violence

14There was no conviction in respect of the incident.

15Section 16(1) of the CVCA provides that compensation may be awarded whether or not a person has been prosecuted or convicted of the offence giving rise to the death.

16Given the evidence, I find the Deceased to be a victim of a crime of violence.

Section 17

17Section 17(1) of the CVCA read as follows:

(1) In determining whether to make an order for compensation and the amount thereof, the Board shall have regard to all relevant circumstances, including any behaviour of the victim that may have directly or indirectly contributed to his or her injury or death.

18In this case, the CICB finds that the fact that Deceased had initiated the shooting is relevant and contributed to his death within the meaning of s. 17(1). The CICB is satisfied that the Deceased was at the scene of the incident armed with a handgun and had the intent of shooting the AOs. In carrying out his plan, the Deceased fired his gun at the AOs and these actions resulted in his own death when they reciprocated in kind.

19Having regard for s. 17(1) of the CVCA and after balancing all of the relevant circumstances, I find that the Deceased’s behaviour was not only illegal but his actions directly contributed to his death. In these circumstances, I do not find that compensation should be awarded, even if the Deceased’s child did not do anything wrong.

20Even if the CICB found that the Deceased’s behaviour had not contributed to his death, the CICB would have denied this application because the Applicant failed to prove that the Deceased was financially supporting the child at the time of the incident. Furthermore, the Applicant failed to provide the CICB with any documentation to support her dependency claim for the child and was also not living with the Deceased at the time of his death. Accordingly, the CICB denies this application.