Court Information
Date: September 22, 2017
Information No.: 2811 998 16 22332
File No.: 16 37523
Ontario Court of Justice
Her Majesty the Queen
v.
Vic Boodoo
Reasons for Ruling
Before the Honourable Justice G. Wakefield
On: September 22, 2017
At: Oshawa, Ontario
Appearances
- M. Flagg – Counsel for the Crown
- D. Slessor – Counsel for the Crown
- M. McRae – Counsel for Vic Boodoo
Reasons for Ruling
WAKEFIELD, J. (Orally):
I am going to proceed to sentencing today. I reviewed the letter from Ms. – I think it is Joyles (ph), and it is good that you have developed that sort of support group, I hope that continues. But there has to be something done today and that brings me to the point of asking you to stand up. And is there anything you want to say to me before I pass sentence?
VIC BOODOO: Your Honour, on this - what I did was wrong and I'm just trying to fix my life.
THE COURT: I hope you do, because you certainly can get into relationships and you have people who care about you here today and that goes a long way, I think, to say that there is good aspects to who you are and I have taken that into account. I appreciate Ms. Joyles has taken the time to give me that letter, that together with the Bell letter will be the next cumulative exhibit.
EXHIBIT Number 5: Two letters – Produced and marked
I have read the cases provided to me by both the Crown and the Defence. It is clearly what I do to your bail release conditions is entirely discretionary.
I think that a house arrest that does not deprive you of employment is less egregious than one that perhaps had deprived you of employment. But at the same time there is a deprivation of liberty inherent in any house arrest. It is not as intrusive as many conditional sentences and I am not aware of any restrictions on what you can do within the residence and you always have the ability to get some fresh air with your surety, but it stops you from enjoying life in the community. I think I have to credit that to some extent, but frankly, it is a minimal effect and one in which I neither see the need nor understand how anybody can calculate a day-per-day for the time that the ten months, I think it was you said, that you were under those conditions, other than the ultimate sentence has taken that into account. I do not think we made the photographs an exhibit – of the complainant. Are you seeking that they be made an exhibit?
MR. FLAGG: I do, Your Honour. I thought that we had?
MADAM CLERK: It is in Exhibit 1.
THE COURT: Exhibit 1, okay. However, what I will be doing is having them sealed in an envelope, not to be opened without an order of a court of competent jurisdiction, given the quasi intimate nature of some of the photographs included in there.
MR. FLAGG: Yes, however, I do believe it's appropriate, Your Honour, that the correctional and/or parole authorities have access to them, because it's relevant in my submission to their deliberations.
THE COURT: No difficulty with that exception from your end? I am not sure that – do the reformatories still have parole hearings?
MR. MCRAE: They do. It's just exceptionally rare, particularly given the length of the sentence being considered here. But I don't take issue with that kind of an exception being made in the circumstances.
THE COURT: All right. So, court competent jurisdiction and/or parole authorities, if requested by them. Your record is going to sink you every time you come back to court. Already I see from looking at the record, that the first entry was one that was entered I think just about your eighteenth birthday, but is reflective of the choices you made as a youth. I cannot help but think that there is a lot more about your background that would put some context to the stream of violent offences that flow from that. Which is why my lack of knowledge that way has opened up the door for my approaching this in a slightly different direction than either your counsel or the Crown.
We've got violence in 2007, a break and enter – it is not clear whether it is a residence or not, and then the next year you are convicted of a robbery, another crime of violence. Two years after that, assault cause bodily harm, together with another assault cause bodily harm – though, different offence dates as was pointed out earlier. And then again, 2012, another cause bodily harm and then even after that you had problems with probation. I am hoping you do not have any further problems with probation from this point forward, because, again, the record is going to sink you.
Finding the right number is certainly not a scientific exercise. What I have come to the conclusion is, is that I do have to credit you for the time you were on the bail release – but as I said, minimally. The number I have come up with is – given the series of violence offences, the domestic nature of this and aspects of really demeaning behaviour to the victim here, in the manner in which you lost control and essentially beat her up. I do accept – because the Crown is not objecting to this, that you came there hoping for a quiet resolution, you came there expecting there would not be arguments - and that is not what happened. But you are a big guy comparatively to what I suspect she is. It is not clear from the photographs, I cannot make any findings of fact that way. You acted way beyond the pale, especially, since the kneeing to the face and the grabbing of her hair in my mind could have resulted in far more serious damage to her. Seven months is the number I have come up with, taking into account the bail conditions and that would be on top of the five days of pre-sentence custody which I am crediting to eight days for sentence, that is equivalent of seven months, eight days. I have not heard anything in contrary to the three years of probation. I think it is a good idea that it is that long, but with the right sort of progress - and you have demonstrated you can do it, you staying out of trouble for chunks of time. Nothing would make me happier for you to bring a variation to either an early termination of probation or loosening of the terms of probation, because of the progress. It does not happen often I get to have somebody come back with that sort of request. When it does happen, the community is better off when people demonstrate that sort of progress.
Probation Order
So, there will be a three-year probationary component to this sentence that will commence on your release. The terms are, that you keep the peace and be of good behaviour, appear before the Court when required to do so. You will notify the Court or the probation officer in advance of any change in your name or address and promptly notify the court or probation officer of any change in your employment or occupation. It will be a reporting order. Report in person to a probation officer within two working days of your release from custody and after that at all times and places as directed by the probation officer or any person authorized by your probation officer to assist in your supervision.
You are not to contact or communicate in any way directly or indirectly by physical, electronic or other means with S.P. – and I do not know of any exceptions necessary here...
MR. MCRAE: No.
THE COURT: ...no exceptions. You will not be within 100 metres of any place you know that person to live, work, go to school, frequent or any place you know the person to be, except for required court appearances.
While there will be another order with respect to a weapons prohibition order, as part of the probation order, you are not to possess any weapons as defined by the Criminal Code, and I use the word "including" as opposed to "for example", a BB gun, pellet gun, firearm, imitation firearm, cross-bow, prohibited or restricted weapon or device, ammunition, explosive substance or anything designed to be used or intended for use to cause death or injury or to threaten or intimidate any person.
And the real reason I want to see a reporting order is paragraph 11 – you will attend and actively participate in all assessments, counselling, rehabilitative programs as directed by your probation officer and complete them to the satisfaction of the probation officer, for domestic violence, which may include the Partner Assault Response – PAR program and under "other" any other counseling to assist in your rehabilitation. A series of violent offences would normally suggest to me that there is an anger issue here and that usually means something in your background. I am not going to inquire as to what, if anything, applies here. What I do want is the door to be open to that. If there is anything you wanted to talk to about a referral to counselling, this is the opportunity to do it. Ideally, you are going to find a mechanism not to act up the way you have so many times and not come back here.
You will sign any release of information forms as to enable your probation officer to monitor your attendance and completion of any assessments, counselling or rehabilitative programs as directed. Under "other" – is it 100 metres from […] Street or off the property of?
MR. FLAGG: I'd....
MR. MCRAE: Off the property of – sorry....
MR. FLAGG: I'd ask for "off the property", but Your Honour indicated 100 metres of any known place - that really covers it.
THE COURT: If she is still there, but you note from her victim impact statement the expectation is that she is moving.
MR. MCRAE: That's right. She's contemplating moving and that – the only reason we weren't going to include a distance restriction, but it's at the corner of […] that building is. So, it's just a very difficult street to remain a hundred metres away from.
THE COURT: Now, if it turns out she is not moving, I will certainly be open to a variation...
MR. MCRAE: Certainly.
THE COURT: ...in the circumstances. But with respect to – in addition, you will remain off the property of […] Street North in the City of Oshawa. Does that cover off all the probationary terms?
MR. MCRAE: It does from my perspective, Sir.
THE COURT: And Sir, you know this, any breach of probation is a new criminal charge. If convicted, your record really does make it very difficult for the judge looking at anything else other than longer and longer periods of custody.
DNA Order
Additionally, it is a primary DNA, there are no submissions against the DNA order. There will be an order that you provide a sample of your DNA. Now, I understand you are already under the regime of that and they may not want any further samples, but if they do, you will have to cooperate with it and you know it is just a drop of blood from your finger.
Weapons Prohibition Order
And finally – I am assuming he does not need a grace period for the 109 order?
MR. MCRAE: No.
THE COURT: Pursuant to s. 109 of the Criminal Code, you are prohibited from possessing a firearm, cross-bow, restricted weapon, ammunition, explosive substance for a period beginning today and ending – it is a lifetime prohibition. After release from imprisonment and from date of – and further prohibited from possessing a prohibited firearm, restricted firearm, prohibited weapon, prohibited device or prohibited ammunition for life as well.
MADAM CLERK: If I could just confirm that's s. 109(3), Your Honour? I believe Mr. Slessor did look the section up.
THE COURT: Is that correct?
MR. SLESSOR: It is.
MR. FLAGG: Yes.
THE COURT: I have a....
MR. SLESSOR: 109(2) is the 10-year and for any other after a second offence, it's for life.
THE COURT: Well, it sort of sounds like a bit of a recourse, that will be (3) as suggested.
Victim Fine Surcharge
MR. FLAGG: And if I may, Your Honour, there's one more. Finally, that would be a $200 victim fine surcharge in this case...
THE COURT: And indeed, there is.....
MR. FLAGG: ...the Crown proceeded by indictment.
THE COURT: Indictment. $200 victim surcharge, two days in custody if not paid. I am assuming he needs at least nine months or would you prefer a year to deal with that? He has employment waiting for him hopefully still at that point in time, but he needs to get back on his financial feet. He has a lot of other financial obligations.
MR. MCRAE: I would suggest 12 months.
THE COURT: One year in which to pay the victim surcharge - don't forget about it, though. As I said, I am very open to shorten the probation, I am very open to turn it into a non-reporting order. Once I see some very real progress – and as I said earlier, nothing would make me happier to grant that sort of request once you have earned it. Good luck.
Non-Communication Order During Custody
MR. FLAGG: Your Honour, I know the Court is about to complete the sentence, but I do submit it is appropriate in my submission that there'd be an order under s. 743.21(1) of the Criminal Code of non-communication...
THE COURT: Just a second...
MR. FLAGG: ...while the gentleman's in custody.
THE COURT: ...743....
MR. FLAGG: ...point 21(1).
THE COURT: Thank you. I agree, it is appropriate. And pursuant to s. 743.21(1), there is an order that you not have any communication with Ms. S.P. during the time that you are in custody.
MR. FLAGG: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
MR. MCRAE: It's kind of stunning that's not automatic. I'm glad my friend brought it up. Thank you, Your Honour.
THE COURT: Thank you for everybody's patience. Good luck, Sir.
Remaining Charges and Federal Matter
MADAM CLERK: The remaining charges on this information?
MR. FLAGG: All to be withdrawn, please, Madam Clerk and Your Honour.
MADAM CLERK: And we haven't addressed the other matter, Mr. McRae?
MR. FLAGG: Yes, there's actually a federal matter, Your Honour. It's at line number....
MADAM CLERK: Mr. McRae, we haven't dealt with the federal matter yet.
MR. FLAGG: Line number 70 on your docket.
MR. MCRAE: I can speak to it in his absence, there's a designation filed.
MR. FLAGG: I know, Your Honour, we're – go ahead, Mr. McRae. This is line 70, Your Honour. This is a federal matter, I'll speak to it as agent.
MR. MCRAE: This is Boodoo that we're on still?
MR. FLAGG: Correct.
MR. MCRAE: That's – two dates have been scheduled for next June.
MR. FLAGG: For trial, correct?
MR. MCRAE: For trial, June 7th in courtroom 402, June 8th in courtroom 404.
THE COURT: And with the Provincial Crown standing in for the Federal Crown, Mr. Boodoo has left the courtroom, however – summary elections?
MADAM CLERK: By indictment.
THE COURT: Designation?
MADAM CLERK: Yes.
THE COURT: Pursuant to a designation, trial dates are now set, June 7th, 2018 at nine-thirty in the morning, marked for the full day in 402 court. Continuing June 8th – I hope I said "June 7th, 2018", did I?
MR. FLAGG: Yes.
THE COURT: And June 8th, 2018, 404 court, nine-thirty in the morning marked for the full day as well.
MR. FLAGG: Thank you.
MR. MCRAE: Thank you.
MADAM CLERK: And we're vacating the prior dates.
THE COURT: And if there are prior dates, now vacated.