Court File and Parties
Court File No.: Newmarket Date: 23 January, 2014 Ontario Court of Justice
Between: Her Majesty the Queen — and — Christopher Tweir
Reasons for Sentence
Counsel: Ms. Jennifer Gleitman for the Crown Mr. Paul Cooper for the Defence
KENKEL J. (Orally):
1Mr. Tweir pleaded guilty to Attempt Murder contrary to s. 239 of the Criminal Code.
2I take into account the circumstances of the offence as outlined in the agreed statement of fact marked as Exhibit #1. The Crown tendered a criminal record marked as Exhibit #2. The record discloses two robbery offences, both dated to 2006 and 2007.
3I also take into account the impact of the offence on the victim as she described in her statement that she read to the court which was marked as Exhibit #3.
4In mitigation I take into account the accused's plea of guilty as an expression of remorse. He had the matter brought forward before the scheduled preliminary hearing to resolve the case.
5I also take into account his personal circumstances as described by counsel. He had success with a residential drug treatment program in the past but went back to the use of cocaine with terrible consequences for his wife and family. If Mr. Tweir is to rebuild his life, much will depend upon whether he applies himself with diligence to drug treatment programs while serving sentence.
6This charge with these horrific facts could easily result in a substantial penitentiary term beyond the sentence jointly submitted by both counsel. But considering the joint submission, carefully crafted after considering numerous circumstances unique to this case, I find that the proposed sentence is within the range.
7I note that Mr. Tweir has spent 500 days in pre-trial custody. There were reasons for that delay and this is not a case where the pre-trial delay was a tactic directed towards sentence. Mr. Cooper has made an application for enhanced credit and provided the court with evidence as to the circumstances of this accused's detention. I've considered R. v. Summers 2013 ONCA 147 and other like cases cited by the defence that set out relevant circumstances that may give rise to enhanced credit for pre-trial custody. I agree with the defence that the accused's circumstances of detention are relevant and similar to circumstances that our appellate court has found in other cases mitigate sentence. I find it fair to consider Mr. Tweir's pre-trial custody on a 1.5 to 1 basis. While that reduces a sentence that is already at the low end of the range, I do not find that the remaining sentence is unfit.
8I will sentence Mr. Tweir to 7 years and 6 months in custody less credit for pre-trial custody. 500 days at 1.5 to 1 is 750 days or 2 years and 20 days leaving a remainder of 5 years, 5 months and 10 days.
9Mr. Tweir will serve a further sentence in the penitentiary of 5 years, 5 months and 10 days.
10In addition I find it necessary for public safety and protection of the victim in this case to make an order under section 743.21 of the Criminal Code prohibiting Mr. Tweir from having any contact with the victim or member of her immediate family during the custodial period of the sentence. There's much work to be done on your part before such contact could ever be considered. It's not plain to me that you would be permitted to have contact with your children while a federal prisoner serving sentence for attempting to kill their mother, but if you apply yourself to drug counselling and domestic violence programs you may be able to make a case for such contact in the future when your release is being considered.
11There will be an order under s. 109 prohibiting you from possessing firearms for life.
12There will be a DNA order directing you to provide a sample of your DNA while in custody for registration on the national databank.
Delivered January 23, 2014.
Justice Joseph F. Kenkel