ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

COURT FILE NO.: CR-12-30000751-0000

DATE: 20150713

B E T W E E N:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Robert Fried, for the Crown

• and -

KAREEM WRIGHT

Monte Macgregor, for the Defendant

HEARD: June 30, 2015,
at Toronto, Ontario

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

Michael G. Quigley J.

Overview

[1] Kareem Wright and two others, Shawn Nelson and Marcus McLean, were charged with having committed a home invasion robbery at 98 Waterbridge Way in Scarborough, Ontario, just before 10 PM on July 2, 2010. They were charged as well with having forcibly confined and assaulted two of the occupants of that house while carrying a weapon. Mr. Nelson and Mr. McLean pleaded guilty on the eve of trial.

[2] In the face of the otherwise compelling evidence presented by the Crown, including being apprehended inside the residence as the robbery was taking place, Mr. Wright testified in his own defence. He insisted that he was not involved with the other two who invaded that residence that night, but had instead had the extremely bad fortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. He testified that the individuals who broke into that home were supposed to be selling him a small quantity of marijuana, and he drove with them to that location simply to pick it up. He claimed to know nothing of the plans of the actual robbers, and that he was not inside the house when any of the alleged criminal offences took place. He was merely an innocent bystander, caught up in circumstances.

[3] In my reasons for judgment dated May 26, 2015, I found Mr. Wright guilty as charged. I found him to be a knowing participant in these events, based on the entirety of the evidence including his own testimony. I did not believe his evidence and was not left in a state of doubt by it. I was also satisfied that the Crown had proven the offences beyond a reasonable doubt on the whole of the evidence: R. v. W. (D.).[^1] As such, I convicted him of each of the charges laid against him. My reasons for judgment are reported at 2015 ONSC 3095.

[4] The issue on this sentencing hearing is what is a fit sentence for this first-time offender on these nevertheless very serious offences.

Summary of Background Facts relating to the Offence

Circumstances of the Offences

[5] On Friday, July 2, 2010. Mr. Adrian Walker, his wife Syldia, and their younger son Curtis were at home relaxing on the Friday evening after Canada Day. Their house at 98 Waterbridge Way is located in a prosperous and well-maintained neighborhood in Scarborough, in the east end of the city of Toronto. Just before 10:00 p.m., the doorbell rang. They were not expecting visitors. When Mr. Walker opened the door, three men were standing there. Some words were spoken and the male who had spoken to him as well as the other two males pushed Mr. Walker backwards into his house.

[6] Mr. Walker was duct taped and threatened with a knife. After he was taped, the shortest of the three assailants went into the living room and cut the phone cord with a second knife. Mrs. Walker came partway down the staircase and froze. She screamed. One of the three assailants went over to her, put a knife to her neck and told her to keep quiet. The assailants headed for the basement and forced the Walker’s to come with them.

[7] When they got to the basement and the lights were turned on, the three assailants turned away from the Walker’s and started to search the basement. They seemed to be searching for something specific. They were searching in the area where Tyrone Walker slept. He was the Walkers’ other son, but who was out at work at the time. The area they searched was also where his possessions were located, including a sawed off shotgun and a 9mm Luger handgun in a case, as well as a quantity of ammunition, all unbeknownst to his parents.

[8] In the meantime, however, and unbeknownst to the assailants, Curtis Walker called 911 from his upstairs bedroom. The police were dispatched and arrived within minutes. While the assailants were searching the basement, Mr. Walker was able to make his way back upstairs, pulling off the duct tape as he did. His wife was still behind him. He ran out the front door towards a neighbour’s house to the west. Right at that moment, a marked Toronto Police Service scout car pulled up in front of the house with siren and lights on.

[9] P.C.’s Staunton and Robertson were the first on scene. They rushed into the house with guns drawn. They found two males standing facing them from the landing that led to the basement staircase and the garage, one step down from the main floor level. The two suspects, Kareem Nelson and Marcus McLean, were taken to the ground and arrested at gunpoint. Mr. Wright was wearing a brown hoodie and Mr. McLean a white shirt with blue jeans. Mr. Walker’s un-refuted evidence is that it was Kareem Wright who knocked on the door and who spoke to Mr. Walker, the shortest of the three assailants, and the person who cut the phone line. The third assailant, Shawn Nelson, was arrested in the basement.

Circumstances of the Offender

[10] Kareem Wright is 32 years of age. He is single and has no children. He was involved in a long-term relationship with a woman, but that has now ended, although he maintains a friendship with her. He currently resides in his family home in Scarborough where he has lived for over 20 years. He was raised by both of his parents who have been married for over 30 years and who have five grown children. Mr. Wright is the middle child amongst six siblings. He has three half siblings and two biological siblings, all of whom reside together. This was a close-knit family that he grew up in, and they all worked together to maintain and look after household responsibilities. They were brought up with Christian values and attended church regularly. There is no indication of any mental health issues or substance abuse issues within the family.

[11] He completed high school at West Hill Collegiate Institute and was apparently averaging between 70% and 80% in his grades. As I noted in my Reasons for Judgment, he reported at trial that he was never suspended or expelled from school. He reported to the probation officer that his favourite subjects were physical education and English. He then enrolled at Centennial College in their business administration program but he did not complete it because he got a job at Telus Telecommunications as a business analyst. He has continued to work for Telus for about 11 years. During the last six years of work, he worked from home. Due to a company downgrading this spring, Mr. Wright is now unemployed but he was given a severance package as of May 15, 2015. He indicated to the probation officer that he wishes in future to invest in residential properties and would like to one day own his own business.

[12] Mr. Wright told the probation officer that he pleaded not guilty and was "at the wrong place at the wrong time." The probation officer reports that while he expressed remorse towards the victim and the victim's family, he was adamant that he had nothing to do with the event that took place that evening. He takes no responsibility for these offences and denies any involvement in them. He further noted that he has no relationship with other persons that are accused in the matter, although as he acknowledged at trial, he “may have known” one of the accused “vaguely” from playing soccer as a youth, though that might be somewhat understated compared to his evidence at trial about his knowledge of Shawn Nelson.

[13] Whether he acknowledges his own responsibility and guilt or not, however, all who know him confirm that involvement in such on offence is entirely out of character, and members of his family express how shocked they were when they heard of the charges. Given his involvement in the community and his contributions to his family, both his father and his sister expressed hope that he could be sentenced to a term of community service and house arrest with conditions to attend school, although plainly, given the parameters established by appellate courts in this province for home invasion robbery offences, and as Mr. Wright is aware, a term of penitentiary incarceration is called for. I also note that the pre-sentence report author expresses some concern with Mr. Wright's criminal acquaintances and his allegedly poor use of leisure time. As such, the author of the pre-sentence report expresses the opinion that Mr. Wright would benefit considerably from an anti-criminal thinking program to address his risk factors, and to provide him with problem-solving skills for the future.

[14] Nevertheless, as I have noted elsewhere in these Reasons, the fact that he is essentially a youthful first-time offender with no prior criminal record are mitigating factors that go to support him being subjected to the minimal sentence that will meet the parameters established by the jurisprudence and the principles of sentencing set out in the Code, particularly, specific individual deterrence of this offender from re-offending and rehabilitation, for which the prospects appear strong.

Legal Parameters

Positions of the Crown and the Defence

[15] Crown counsel seeks a penitentiary sentence of 5-6 years before pre-trial custody or Downes cre