D. Boulet

The offenders were found guilty of uttering a forged document, obstructing justice, and attempted fraud over $5,000 after presenting a forged civil judgment bearing a judge's signature.

The Crown sought penitentiary sentences for both.

The court sentenced the first offender, a paralegal with a related record, to three years in custody.

The second offender, a first-time offender with minimal risk of re-offending, received a conditional sentence of two years less a day.

Following guilty pleas to manslaughter and four counts of assault causing bodily harm arising from a series of random attacks, the Crown applied to have the offender declared a dangerous offender under s. 753 of the Criminal Code.

The court found that while the offender demonstrated a pattern of repetitive violent behaviour, the evidence did not establish a likelihood of future violence under s. 753(1)(a)(i).

However, the court held that the offender’s conduct showed a substantial degree of indifference to the reasonably foreseeable consequences of his actions under s. 753(1)(a)(ii).

The offender was therefore designated a dangerous offender.

Instead of an indeterminate sentence, the court imposed a determinate sentence of ten years’ imprisonment followed by a ten‑year long‑term supervision order, concluding there was a reasonable expectation that such a regime would adequately protect the public.