ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
— AND —
Corey Barclay HURREN
Before Justice Robert Wadden
Plea on February 5, 2021; Submissions on February 23, 2021
Reasons released on March 10, 2021
Meaghan Cunningham counsel for the Crown
Michael Davies counsel for the defendant
SENTENCE
WADDEN J.:
1On the morning of July 2, 2020 Corey Hurren drove to the grounds of Rideau Hall, the property containing the residences of the Governor General and the Prime Minister, and rammed his pick-up truck into the front gates. With the truck disabled, Mr. Hurren took two shotguns and a semi-automatic rifle and walked onto the grounds, looking for the home of the Prime Minister. When police located him he took cover behind a tree. He was directed to drop his firearms and refused. The police engaged him in conversation, and after a 90 minute standoff, he surrendered and was arrested.
2Mr. Hurren was taken into custody and charged with numerous firearms offences. On February 5, 2021 he pleaded guilty to eight charges, including possession of firearms for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, possession of a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm and a prohibited high capacity magazine, and mischief to property for damaging the gates to Rideau Hall. He is before me today for sentencing. Counsel for the Crown and defence have made submissions and both agree that a penitentiary sentence is necessary, although they disagree on the length. Mr. Hurren’s counsel is seeking a sentence of three years imprisonment and Crown counsel is seeking a sentence of six years.
Facts of the Offences
3The facts of these offences were admitted by Mr. Hurren when he entered his guilty pleas, and are set out in an Agreed Statement of Facts that was filed as an exhibit.
4On July 2, 2020 at about 6:30 a.m. Mr. Hurren crashed his pickup truck into the gates outside Rideau Hall, causing approximately $100,000 in damage to the property. His truck was immobilized as a result of the crash. He then got out of his truck and took three firearms – a 12 gauge shotgun, loaded with five rounds, a .308 Winchester semi-automatic rifle, loaded with twenty rounds, and a second 12 gauge shotgun, also loaded with five rounds. There were also two handguns that he left behind in his truck – a .22 calibre revolver loaded with nine rounds and a prohibited .38 calibre handgun loaded with two rounds. He left a handwritten note in the truck in which he had written that he was “afraid for the future of Canada and that it is now under a communist dictatorship. … With the firearms ban and seeing more of our rights being taken away, on top of bankrupting the county, I could no longer sit back and watch this happen. I hope this is a wakeup call and a turning point.”
5Armed with the three loaded guns, Mr. Hurren walked onto the grounds, where Rideau Hall, the residence of the Governor General, and Rideau Cottage, the residence of Prime Minister Trudeau and his family, are located. The Prime Minister had held daily press briefings in front of Rideau Cottage during the pandemic, and Mr. Hurren later told the police that he knew Prime Minister Trudeau’s location as a result of those briefings.
6As Mr. Hurren walked onto the Rideau Hall grounds RCMP officers set out to intercept him. Before Mr. Hurren got very far he was approached by Cst. Gostock. Mr. Hurren responded by taking cover behind a large tree. Cst. Gostock identified himself and ordered Mr. Hurren to drop his guns. Mr. Hurren refused to do so. A second officer, Cst. Nguyen, arrived on scene. Mr. Hurren continued to refuse to give up his weapons. Both officers engaged Mr. Hurren in conversation to try to deescalate the situation.
7Mr. Hurren told the officers that he was there to arrest Prime Minister Trudeau. He described Mr. Trudeau as a communist whom he said was above the law and corrupt. He wanted to make a statement to the Prime Minister by showing up during his daily media briefing to show anger about recent firearms amendments and Covid-19 restrictions. He said he was angry about the gun ban and losing his hunting rifles, that he felt betrayed by the government and was worried about his children growing up in this country. Among other things, he said he wanted to see the Governor General to ask her to deal with Prime Minister Trudeau.
8After 90 minutes, Mr. Hurren surrendered to the officers. He was arrested and taken into police custody. During the standoff he had not raised his guns to the officers or fired them; he kept them pointed to the ground the whole time.
9After he was arrested, the police searched Mr. Hurren’s phone, on which they found several conversations he had with others about the topics of politics, Covid-19 and conspiracy theories relating to the Liberal government. The conversations included discussion of the Nova Scotia shooting in April 2020 and Mr. Hurren’s opposition to the firearms restrictions enacted after that. There were also saved posts and comments about U.S. politics and the U.S. government, and about government influence over people’s lives.
10There was no evidence that anyone else had been involved in Mr. Hurren’s actions, or that he had told anyone in advance of what he intended to do.
Background of Corey Hurren & Psychiatric Report
11Mr. Hurren is a 46 year old from Bowsman, Manitoba. Prior to July 2, 2020 he had been struggling to establish a small business and had also been in the military reserve as a Master Corporal with the Canadian Rangers. He had grown up on a farm in Manitoba, had held several jobs over the years, and had been living with his wife and two children at their home north of Bowsman until he travelled to Ottawa and committed these offences.
12A psychiatric report was prepared by Dr. Jonathan Gray of the Royal Ottawa Hospital, one of Canada’s leading forensic psychiatrists, who interviewed Mr. Hurren and conducted an assessment of him.
13In his interviews with Dr. Gray, Mr. Hurren provided extensive information about his background and his motivations for his actions. He told Dr. Gray that he had been having economic and other challenges for a number of years, and suffered from chronic arthritic pain. He had struggled to start a business while holding a full-time job. The efforts to make a living put strains on his family life and led to little time with his children. His marriage suffered. He did not have many friends in his community to turn to. He lost his job in the fall of 2019 and his small business had been inactive since early 2020. By June 2020 his firearms license was expiring and he did not have the money to pay for a renewal. He also discovered at that time there was now a ban on a number of firearms he owned. He began writing emails to Members of Parliament, which went unanswered. His financial difficulties accumulated, and he was receiving calls threatening to repossess his truck. He decided to go to Ottawa at that point, realizing that he had to “send a message” soon, because if he lost his truck he would have no means to get to Ottawa.
14Mr. Hurren told Dr. Gray that his intention in going to Rideau Hall was to “send a message”. He told Dr. Gray that his plan was to “disrupt a press conference outside the cottage” where the Prime Minister was living. Mr. Hurren said he expected to be shot dead and that would serve as a message about his frustration. In describing the events on the grounds of Rideau Hall he noted that he did not point a gun at the RCMP officer, but he did not put his guns down when ordered to do so by the police, explaining that “I didn’t want to put my guns down because if I put them down, they would stop listening and I would be arrested.”
15Mr. Hurren alluded to a conspiracy theory around “Event 201”, a simulated pandemic exercise in the fall of 2019; Mr. Hurren was of the view that there was some validity to the theory that the Covid-19 pandemic was planned and preventable, and that the restrictions did not have to happen. Mr. Hurren told Dr. Gray that he did not agree with the Prime Minister’s decision to shut down Parliament due to the pandemic, stating his belief that this resulted in no functioning government. He said that the Prime Minister’s actions amounted to communism, and that the whole country had become reliant on payments from the government, as in communist states. He also voiced dissatisfaction with the fact that Prime Minister Trudeau had attended public protests while Parliament had remained closed. Dr. Gray noted that part of Mr. Hurren’s motivation was his negative view of the government’s handling of the pandemic and the new prohibitions on firearms.
16In his psychiatric assessment, Dr. Gray found that Mr. Hurren was not experiencing hallucinations but that he was acting out of what he felt was desperation. According to Dr. Gray, “Although [Mr. Hurren] has believed in some beliefs considered to be ‘conspiracy theories’, his views are shared by a fairly large network of other people on the internet and would not be considered a delusion from the psychiatric sense of the word.”
17Dr. Gray found that Mr. Hurren had no psychotic disorder. There was no indication of abuse of drugs or alcohol, and no post-traumatic stress disorder.
18Dr. Gray learned from Mr. Hurren’s wife that he had recently been depressed and would spend most of the day laying around, browsing the internet. Taken in conjunction with information obtained from Mr. Hurren, including his report of recent suicidal thoughts, Dr. Gray formed the opinion that Mr. Hurren was suffering from a mood disorder – a major depression. Dr. Gray was of the opinion that “alhough [Mr. Hurren] had been coping with several life stressors for a few months towards the end of 2019, his ability to handle these stressors was severely compromised when he lost access to his usual diversional activities in the early part of 2020. Loss of these coping mechanisms prevented him from dealing with these stressors in an effective way, leading to the mood disorder.” Dr. Gray thought the major depression may have played a role in Mr. Hurren’s decision to travel to Ottawa to “send a message”, expecting to die in the process.
Sentencing Principles and Law
(a) Criminal Code
19The issue before me is to decide the appropriate sentence for Mr. Hurren. To do so, I must consider the relevant provisions in the Criminal Code and previous cases that have considered these offences. I must consider the aggravating and mitigating factors of these offences and the circumstances of Mr. Hurren.
20Section 718 of the Criminal Code states that “The fundamental purpose of sentencing is to protect society and to contribute, along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society …”. The section goes on to state that specific objectives of sentencing are to “denounce unlawful conduct and the harm done to victims or to the community that is caused by unlawful conduct; … to deter the offender and other persons from committing offences; … [and] to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders.” An overarching principle is, as stated in s. 718.1 of the Code, that “A sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender.”
21Mr. Hurren has pleaded guilty to eight offences, including seven firearms charges and one count of mischief to property. The most serious offences, of possession of firearms for a purpose dangerous to the public peace (s. 88), possession of a loaded prohibited handgun (s. 95(2)) and possession of an illegal magazine for one of the rifles (s. 92(2)) carry a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. The offences of careless handling of the rifles, under s. 86(2) of the Code, carry a maximum penalty of 2 years in prison. The charge of mischief to property, under s. 430, for the damage to the Rideau Hall gates, carries a maximum penalty of ten years. None of the charges have a minimum penalty; the previous minimum sentence of three years for s. 95(2) was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Nur 2015 SCC 15.
(b) Case Law
22Counsel have referred me to a number of cases that have considered sentences for firearms offences, but as they have candidly pointed out there are no cases that have considered a fact situation similar to Mr. Hurren’s.
23Defence counsel cited R. v. Graham, 2018 ONSC 6817, in which Mr. Justice Code considered the law applicable to s. 95 firearms offences, stating that “it is settled law that denunciation, deterrence and protection of the public are the predominant sentencing objectives because of the prevalence and the great danger posed by loaded handguns …” (para 36). He held that since the Supreme Court in R. v. Nur had struck down the mandatory minimum sentence, the appropriate range for someone with no criminal record committing a s. 95 offence is in the range of two to three years. Where the offence is associated with other criminal activity, the range of sentence is three to five years. In the context discussed by Mr. Justice Code, the upper end of the range of eight to ten years is reserved for those who have previous convictions for this offence and who breach firearms prohibition orders.
24The Crown relies on R. v. Mohiadin 2020 ONSC 47, in which a young man with no criminal record was sentenced to 38 months jail for the possession of a loaded handgun that he had been carrying around the city in a concealed manner. The Crown also cites R. v. Wiwchar [2015] BCSC 1702, in which fourteen firearms were found in the search of an apartment and the offender, who had an extensive criminal record, was sentenced to ten years imprisonment.
25I note that the circumstances of the cases cited are very different from Mr. Hurren’s fact situation. Those cases have dealt with possession of firearms in settings where guns were found in the search of a residence or a vehicle, or on a suspect, or were thrown away during a flight from police. These facts are typical of firearms cases that come before the courts. Most cases involving illegal firearms charges occur when the offender is hiding the firearm, and usually involve a single firearm. Where there are multiple firearms they tend to be stored and hidden in one location, as in R. v. Wiwchar. The facts in Mr. Hurren’s case are distinguishable – he had armed himself with numerous loaded firearms, had tried to force his truck through the gates of Rideau Hall, and then deliberately took his guns and went onto public property for the purpose of confronting the Prime Minister at his residence. This is a unique fact situation.
Aggravating Factors
26The aggravating factors in this case include the planning involved, the number of firearms used, the attempt to breach the gates with a vehicle, the standoff with the police and the political motivation behind the attack.
(a) Planning
27Mr. Hurren told the police that he had left Manitoba about two days before Canada Day, and driven to Ottawa. Prior to doing so he had apparently packed his truck with the three rifles and two handguns and ammunition. He made an excuse to his wife to explain his absence, telling her he was on military duty. He told Dr. Gray that he had brought military rations to eat along the way, and that he had brought his military ID in case he got stopped and questioned. The day before his attack on Rideau Hall he had eaten a good meal at The Keg, knowing it could be his last. On the morning of the attack he had written a note explaining his actions. Before he rammed the gate he had taken the time to text the note to a friend in Manitoba. On all the evidence before me, it is clear that Mr. Hurren left Manitoba for the sole purpose of committing this armed confrontation. This took planning on his part, including packing his truck with his weapons, preparing for the long drive, explaining his absence, spending days driving to Ottawa and then finding his way to Rideau Hall.
(b) Number of Firearms
28The degree to which Mr. Hurren was armed is shocking – two loaded shotguns and a loaded semi-automatic rifle, all carried on his person, and two more loaded handguns in his truck. The possession and use of a prohibited high capacity magazine made the firearms even more deadly. He had thirty active rounds loaded and ready to use in the guns on his person, and another eleven rounds available in the handguns in the truck.
(c) The Assault on the Gates and the Stand-off
29Mr. Hurren drove his pickup truck into the front gates of the Rideau Hall grounds with such force that the impact disabled his truck. With the truck immobile, he got out and continued on foot. He was confronted by the police very soon after getting onto the property, but he did not immediately surrender to them. He refused to surrender his weapons, and he refused to allow the officers to come closer to him. The officers had to speak and negotiate with him for 90 minutes before he gave up. During this time the officers were confronted by a situation with an armed gunman that could have turned deadly at any moment.
30It is to be noted that Mr. Hurren did not fire any of his guns, nor did he point them at the police who confronted him. Had he done so, he would have been facing different, and more serious, charges.
(d) Political Motivation
31Mr. Hurren’s motives are of great concern and are an aggravating factor on sentence. In his statements to the police and to Dr. Gray, and in his handwritten note, Mr. Hurren made it clear that his actions were politically motivated. He had gone to Rideau Hall to confront Prime Minister Trudeau as he conducted his televised daily news conference. Mr. Hurren wanted to make a public display of his views. In his note he detailed the political reasons behind his actions. He was angry about the parliamentary shutdown. He was angry about new gun restrictions and he linked the firearms ban to the conspiracy theory around Event 201. He felt his rights were being taken away and he felt that Canada had turned communist. He specifically stated his intention that his actions would be “a wake up call and a turning point.”
(e) Lack of Remorse or Insight
32In all the evidence I have before me, there is no indication of any remorse on Mr. Hurren’s part, or any indication he has insight into the wrongfulness of his actions. There is no indication he has renounced the conspiracy views he held, nor is there any indication that he recognizes the wrongfulness of taking armed action to express his political views. I have not heard any acknowledgment from Mr. Hurren that he recognizes that what he did was wrong.
Mitigating Factors
33The mitigating factors to take into account are Mr. Hurren’s plea of guilty, his lack of a relevant criminal record, his prior work and family history and the fact that he was in a state of depression at the time of his crimes.
(a) Guilty Plea
34Mr. Hurren is to be given credit for his guilty plea. Although the plea occurred many months after the offences, the case has been on this path for a long time. No trial or preliminary hearing dates were set. Time was required to retain counsel, review disclosure, prepare a psychiatric report and deal with charges in Manitoba, where more rifles were found in a search of his home. I accept this was a plea of guilty at the first reasonable opportunity, taking into account delays due to the pandemic.
35It may be questioned as to how much credit should be given for a plea of guilty in the face of such overwhelming evidence. It is true that Mr. Hurren was facing a virtually unassailable case – he was found with the guns on him, while he was illegally on government property. He had written out a lengthy confession and had made many admissions to the police officers. However, in spite of this, credit should be given for the guilty plea. Even with an overwhelming case, contesting the charges could have dragged out this process for years. There is credit to be given for saving society and the courts the expense of trial, especially with resources so limited due to the pandemic. There is also credit for the sense of closure that an early guilty plea gives to these disturbing events – this can be dealt with while the incident is still recent, not a distant memory.
(b) Lack of Criminal Record
36Mr. Hurren only has one prior encounter with the law – a conviction for impaired driving in 1999. This is dated and unrelated to the offences before me. He has no prior convictions for firearms offences.
(c) Work and Family History
37Mr. Hurren’s personal history prior to these offences seemed relatively stable. He was born in 1974 in rural Manitoba and grew up on a farm. He finished high school and trained as a conservation officer. He operated some businesses but ran into financial problems and filed for bankruptcy in 2002. He had spent time in the military in his late twenties and had recently re-joined on a part-time basis. Over the years he worked at various jobs including taxidermy, meat processing and information technology. He had lost his most recent job in the fall of 2019, and his fledgling small business had failed in early 2020. He is married and has two children. His aging mother lives near his home in Manitoba and he was a source of support to her. Over the years, Mr. Hurren volunteered with his local Lions Club until its activities shut down in March 2020 due to the pandemic. He had stressors in his personal life, including strife with extended family and within his marriage, but before he committed these offences there is not anything in his life that seems very much out of the ordinary. Since he has been in jail on these charges he has taken numerous courses, to the extent he has been able to in the current environment.
(d) Depression Diagnosis
38Mr. Hurren was assessed by Dr. Gray, who ruled out psychiatric disorders but found that Mr. Hurren was suffering from major depression, which may have played a role in his decision to travel to Ottawa and “send a message”. Dr. Gray was of the opinion that Mr. Hurren likely expected to die in the process, or at least not care if he lived through it. Dr. Gray felt that Mr. Hurren’s life stressors became too much for him once many aspects of his life, including his business, his work with the Rangers and activities with the Lions Club, were cut off due to the pandemic.
Analysis
39Although Mr. Hurren had a fairly ordinary life prior to these offences, the community support he had is no longer available to him. His business and job had been lost before these events took place. As a result of these crimes, he has been discharged from the military. His wife has filed for divorce.
40In considering the psychiatric evidence, I do not have any indication that Mr. Hurren has insight into his depression and would be working to cure it. I do not have an indication of what treatment, if any, would be available to him or that he would be willing to take it. The fact that he was making an assault on government property that knew was potentially suicidal raises serious concerns about his future behaviour if the underlying depression is not acknowledged and treated.
41Although he was depressed at the time of these offences, what spurred Mr. Hurren to action – to arm himself, load his guns, drive to Ottawa and attack Rideau Hall – were his political views, including some conspiracy theories. There is no evidence that he has renounced the conspiracy theories, or that he has recognized the wrongfulness of using armed force to express his political views. He has not expressed remorse for his actions.
42I find that Mr. Hurren represents an ongoing risk. Sentencing principles of denunciation and deterrence are paramount in crimes involving loaded guns; in this case, specific deterrence of Mr. Hurren is also an important consideration.
43The maximum sentence for Mr. Hurren’s crimes is ten years imprisonment. The maximum is reserved for the worst circumstances committed by the worst offender. Mr. Hurren is not the worst offender, but the circumstances of the crimes he committed – an armed attack on the residence of the Prime Minister, for political motives - are very nearly the worst circumstances for the illegal possession and handling of firearms. As he pleaded guilty and has no criminal record, Mr. Hurren would not be receiving the maximum sentence of ten years, but even with the mitigating factors in his favour he could well be facing a sentence closer to the top end of the range. In seeking a six year sentence, the Crown is taking a very reasonable position.
44A sentence of three years, as sought by the defence, would not be appropriate in this case. A sentence in that range would be given for a first time offender found with a single prohibited firearm, someone who did not resist police and was not actively doing anything with the gun. Mr. Hurren was in possession of a total of five loaded firearms, including handguns and rifles. He deliberately brought the loaded guns to Rideau Hall and carried them as he intruded onto government property. He engaged in a 90 minute standoff with the police, refusing to surrender his guns. His possession of the firearms in this context posed a risk that the weapons would be used at any point to inflict serious bodily harm or death.
45The deliberateness of Mr. Hurren’s actions and his intentional use of loaded weapons to make a political statement bring him a long way from a usual first offender caught with a single gun.
46Corey Hurren committed a politically motivated armed assault intended to intimidate Canada’s elected government. He rammed his truck into the gates protecting the residences of the Governor General and the Prime Minister, then armed himself with loaded guns and strode onto the grounds, with the stated purpose of targeting the Prime Minister. Mr. Hurren carefully planned his actions, and he committed them for the purpose of bringing attention to his political views. He forced his way onto the grounds of Prime Minister Trudeau’s residence, intending to have a confrontation. This was an armed aggression against the government which must be denounced in the strongest terms.
47The lowest appropriate sentence that could be given in this case is six years imprisonment.
48Mr. Hurren has been in custody since July 2, 2020, or 249 days. With enhanced credit for pre-sentence custody, counsel are in agreement that the time served is worth one year of pre-sentence credit. Having determined that a six year sentence is to be imposed, the reminder for Mr. Hurren to serve is five years in the penitentiary.
Conclusion
49Mr. Hurren’s sentence will be broken down as follows:
50On count 3, that Mr. Hurren had in his possession, for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, a restricted Hi-Standard revolver, a prohibited International Arms Break Open pistol, a prohibited Norinco M14 rifle, a Lakefield Mossberg shotgun, a Grizzly Arms shotgun and prohibited high capacity magazine, contrary to s. 88 of the Criminal Code, the sentence will be the equivalent of six years jail. With credit for 249 days of presentence custody, worth 365 days, Mr. Hurren will have a remaining five years to serve in jail;
51On Counts 1 & 2, for careless handling of the rifles, the sentence for each count will be two years concurrent;
52On counts 4, 5, 6 and 7, which particularize possession of the restricted and prohibited weapons, the sentence for each will be five years concurrent; and
53On count 8, relating to damage to the gate of Rideau Hall grounds, the sentence will be two years concurrent.
Ancillary Orders
54A sample of DNA will be taken for the DNA Databank.
55There will be an order for the forfeiture and destruction of the firearms seized.
56Finally, pursuant to s. 109 of the Criminal Code, Mr. Hurren will be prohibited from possession of any firearms, ammunition or explosive substances for life.
Released: March 10, 2021
Justice Robert Wadden