Reasons for Sentence

DATE: 20160630 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Elizabeth Jackson and Phil Tsui, for the Crown

- and -

DELLAN McMORRIS Brian Ross and Jillian Carrington, for the Defendant

Trafford J.

THIS IS AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE REASONS FOR SENTENCE THAT MAY BE USED FOR AN APPEAL IF IT IS SIGNED IN ORIGINAL BY TRAFFORD J.

A. Introduction

In September 2013, Jerome Bent and Dellan McMorris were arrested and charged with first degree murder in connection with the murder of Delano Coombs in May 2012 at 4020 Dundas Street West, in Toronto.

In July 2015, Bent entered a plea of guilty to the charge of first degree murder, and was sentenced in January 2016 to life imprisonment with a parole ineligibility period of 25 years.

On June 24, 2012, the jury returned a verdict of Guilty of first degree murder against McMorris.

This is the sentencing of McMorris.

B. The Circumstances of the Case

Let me begin with the circumstances of the case, as found by the Court, keeping in mind that aggravating circumstances must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. See R. v. Gardiner (1982), 68 C.C.C. (2d) 477 (SCC). Any other fact must be proven on a balance of probabilities. See s. 724(3)(d) of the Code. The circumstances of the case must also be consistent with the verdict of the jury. See R. v. Cooney (1995), 98 C.C.C. (3d) 146 (Ont. C.A.). Where the basis of the verdict is unclear, the trial judge should make his own findings of fact, consistent with the jury's verdict. See R. v. Roncaioli 2011 ONCA 378 and R. v. Ferguson, 2008 SCC 6, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 96 at para. 18. The trial judge should only make those findings of fact necessary for sentencing purposes. See Ferguson at paras. 18 and 21.

On May 10, 2012, Delano Coombs was shot and killed in a laneway of a townhouse complex at 4020 Dundas Street West, as he drove westbound towards Howland Street at a slow speed. Joel Edwards was a passenger in the car. Edwards was not targeted by the shooters, or struck by any bullets. It was about 2:55 p.m.

Many shots were fired at Coombs by two firearms, a 9 mm handgun and a 10 mm handgun. A third handgun was used by a third perpetrator, but it did not fire any shots because it was defective. All of the handguns, 3 of them, were fired towards the car, as it approached a stairwell on the north side of the laneway near the exit from the complex at Howland Street. Three different persons fired the three handguns. The deceased was ambushed by these three men, in furtherance of a plan to kill him that was deliberated upon and implemented intentionally, by all of them. Jerome Bent and Dellan McMorris were two of the shooters; the third shooter is a person unknown.

Bent fired a Glock 17 handgun, which is capable of firing 9 mm calibre cartridges. Nine 9 mm cartridge cases were found in the laneway by the FIS of the TPS, east of the stairwell. They were all fired by the same handgun. One 10 mm cartridge case was found in the stairwell. Four bullets were found in the deceased's body during the autopsy; a fifth was found in the bag used to transfer the body to the morgue. Those bullets all had class characteristics of a 9 mm calibre. They were likely related to the 9 mm cartridge cases found at the scene.

The murderous assault on the deceased began when two or three bullets were fired from a position outside of the car near the front passenger corner of the car, by Bent. Two of them perforated the windshield. The third one did not, but may have impacted the windshield. The two passed through the passenger compartment and exited through the opened driver's door, or struck the driver, Coombs. The deceased had opened the door and tried to escape, but stumbled and fell to the pavement. One of the shooters, Bent, who was wearing a black hoodie, moved from a position near the front of the car towards the deceased when he was on the pavement, and shot him several times. Bent then ran from the complex to Howland Street, jumped over the fence near the tracks, removed the hoodie, left it in a yard of a residence north of the tracks and ran away. The defendant's DNA was on the cuff of the right sleeve of the black hoodie. That shooter, as I said, was Jerome Bent. The other two perpetrators, one of whom was the defendant, took flight in a different direction. It was around 3 p.m.

Bent met McMorris and the other perpetrator on Old Dundas Street as a result of a call by the defendant to Bent, around 2:25 p.m. This meeting was in the presence of Amanda Rumbolt. She was Bent's girlfriend since February 2012. He spent a lot of time in her apartment as of March 2012. She had a child by him. Rumbolt and Bent went for a drive on May 10, 2012, to spend some time together. She drove aimlessly until the defendant called Bent. The conversation was a brief one. After the conversation, Bent said "…take me to Old Dundas Street… I'm meeting some friends…". A purposeless drive for Bent became a purposive drive for Bent. This was the last of 7 brief conversations between Bent and McMorris from about 1:30 p.m. to 2:25 p.m. Rumbolt drove to Old Dundas Street, and parked. Another car arrived and parked nearby. The defendant and another man exited from its passenger side. The black hoodie and the handguns to be used in the shooting of Coombs were in the car, as arranged for by McMorris and the other man. The driver stayed in the car. Bent said to Rumbolt "…wait… do not leave… I will be back…". Bent left Rumbolt in her car, and met the defendant and the other man, privately. The three men had a conversation, I infer, about the shooting of Coombs. The three of them entered the other car, and drove to 4020 Dundas Street West. It was likely around 2:30 p.m.

Shortly before 2:55 p.m., Bent, McMorris and the other man waited in the stairwell for McMorris. By then, they had reason to believe he was about to drive from the complex. How that came about is not clear on the evidence. That aspect of the case, and the motivation for the murder have not been proven to my satisfaction. Coombs was shot and killed in the circumstances described earlier in these reasons.

In my view, the defendant aided and abetted Bent in the planned and deliberate murder of Coombs. He purposively assisted or encouraged Bent, knowing of Bent's planning and deliberation about shooting Coombs. He arranged for, and provided, the car to drive them to the scene of the murder, and the black hoodie to be worn by one of them during the murder. The hoodie provided a measure of cover-up of the facial and other features of the person who wore it, Bent. It was bulky and black. The defendant fired the 10 mm handgun or attempted to fire the defective handgun. The defendant's arrangements for, and participation in, the murder of Coombs were purposive, knowledgeable, planned, deliberate and intentional.

These then are the circumstances of the case, as found by the Court.

C. The Effect of the Murder

The murder of Delano Coombs has tragically affected those who loved him. His sister Toni Rodney prepared a victim impact statement and read it to the Court. She described the very close relationship she and her children had with Delano, as follows:

He showed love, authority and respect to my children. All of them. Something an uncle should do. Now that's been crushed. He was funny, silly, shy, nurturing, caring… and he meant the world to us, his family.

Delano made mistakes, but they don't define him. Because of this murder, he will never get to see his family, make a remark or gesture, or a loving stare or even physical engagement. I'll never get to see what he looks like with grey hair, a big belly, a crooked walk with a cane… I'll never get to see him old.

Being able to speak today is bittersweet for me. It will not bring back my brother. He is lifeless. He is gone. My dear little brother, Delano Kingsley Coombs.

These sentiments are similar to the remarks by the deceased's mother to the court upon the sentencing of Jerome Bent on January 22, 2016 before McMahon J. She said:

Delano Coombs is my son. I never knew what it was like to have a nervous breakdown, but I came close after his death. I had to be on medication. Yes, since all this has happened, I have lost my job. I have not taken note of all my expenses. I fear for my life, and for my family. I often feel fearful anywhere I go, and I don't know if I will ever get rid of that feeling. Even years later, I feel that somebody will hurt me or my family. I want to express to the Court how I feel as a mother. At this time, I have no sympathy for any of the accused. Maybe down the road, not now. Unless you have felt our pain, please don't interfere with our feelings. Yes, we can get some form of help from counsellors, but that won't bring our Delano back. Delano is the youngest of six children. What I don't understand is why this happened to me, and why my son was murdered. He was taken away from us. Jerome Bent wounded me and my family for no reason. We are scarred by his actions for life. Thank you.

His family is a close one that is devastated by his death.

D. The Background of McMorris

The defendant is presently 26 years old. He was born in Canada and raised by a single mother in the complex at 4020 Dundas Street West. To him, it was a nice place until about 2003, when the recreational programs in the facility were cancelled. This led him and many of the youth who lived in the complex or others in the area to use and deal in marijuana and cocaine. The defendant associated with them, at school and at the various complexes. One such person was Jerome Bent. The defendant dropped out of high school and was not able to obtain any gainful employment. Eventually, the defendant began to deal in such drugs, in part, to support his child by a woman he loved. The child is now 5 years old. His father lives in Jamaica and, I gather, has not contributed to the development of his son.

The defendant has a criminal record. From May 2008 to August 2008, he was convicted of two crimes, theft under $5,000 in May 2008 and failing to comply with a probation order in August 2008. For those crimes he was sentenced to, respectively, twelve months of probation in Youth Court and time served, 15 days, in Adult Court.

The defendant was arrested and charged with first degree murder in September 2013. He remained in custody until he was released on bail in February 2016. The conditions of the release were strict in that they required him to stay within his residence at all times, with two exceptions -- to attend court and to attend at his lawyer's office in order to prepare the defence. His location was monitored by an ankle bracelet. He complied with the terms of the bail.

While in custody pending trial, that is, until his release in February 2016, the defendant completed his high school education. His institutional record does not include any disciplinary measures, or any institutional or Criminal Code offences.

E. The Legal Analysis of the Case

What, then, is a fit sentence in the circumstances of the case?

Dellan McMorris is sentenced to life imprisonment with a parole ineligibility period of 25 years, as required by the Code.

An order is made under s. 109 of the Code prohibiting Dellan McMorris from possessing any firearm, ammunition, explosive substance or other item referred to in s. 109 of the Code for life, as required by the Code.

An order is also made under s. 487.051 of the Code authorizing the taking from Dellan McMorris of the number of samples of bodily substances that are reasonably required for the purpose of a forensic DNA analysis, as required by the Code.

Let me give brief reasons in support of this sentence.

The governing principles of sentencing upon a conviction for first degree murder are general and specific deterrence, and denunciation. These principles reflect the societal abhorrence for violence by way of firearms that leads to the loss of life.

People who commit the crime of first degree murder are subject to the most harsh sentencing provisions in the Code -- life imprisonment with parole ineligibility for at least 25 years. This regime reflects the value we place on any person's life, whatever its frailty, whatever its quality by the conventional norms of our society and whatever the path of the person's life to death has been. The loss of the life of a disadvantaged person is treated the same way as the loss of the life of an advantaged person. Differences in race, ethnic origin or other fundamental aspects of life are of no significance to the determination of a fit sentence for someone who murders another person, and plans and deliberates about it. The life of Delano Coombs was treasured by those who loved him. It is respected by this Court.

Many people are devastated by a crime like this one. Gun violence is senseless. It has no redeeming social value. Those close to the victim are devastated, irremediably so. The person whom they loved is inexplicably removed their lives, oftentimes with no prospect of any replacement. Single mothers and loved ones of the offenders suffer a similar fate, despite the efforts they have made over the course of the offender's life to nurture his growth to a decent set of values that will provide them with a good and happy life. The administration of justice responds with a harsh sentence, but the way of preventing such tragedy in the community lies elsewhere.

F. Conclusion

In conclusion, this sentence is required by the Code. The court has no discretion in cases like this one. But this sentence does contribute to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing a just sanction. It reflects the gravity of the crime and the moral responsibility of Dellan McMorris. It is proportionate to the wrong he has committed. It does not attempt to establish an equivalence between the loss of Delano Coombs' life and the sanction imposed on the defendant -- the end of one life, Coombs, does not lead to the end of another life, McMorris. This is the Canadian tradition, one that is respected here and abroad in other free and democratic societies. It is not arbitrary or unduly harsh. It is in the interests of justice and the values the rule of law is based upon in Canada.

June 30, 2016 Trafford J.

THIS IS AN OFFICIAL COPY OF THE REASONS FOR SENTENCE THAT MAY BE USED FOR AN APPEAL IF IT IS SIGNED IN ORIGINAL BY TRAFFORD J.