CITATION: R. v. Thomas, 2016 ONSC 7944
COURT FILE NO.: CR-14-0109
DATE: 2016-12-19
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Robert Kozak and Nicole Stortini, for the Crown
- and -
PRISCILLA LYNN THOMAS
Frances Thatcher and Karen Scullion, for the Accused
Accused
HEARD: October 14, 2016, at Thunder Bay, Ontario
Mr. Justice W.D. Newton
Reasons For Sentence
Overview
[1] Priscilla Lynn Thomas was charged with the second-degree murder of Jeffrey Munroe on June 25, 2014 contrary to section 235 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
[2] On April 4, 2016, Ms. Thomas pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder but guilty to the lesser included offence of manslaughter contrary to section 234 of the Criminal Code. A presentence report was ordered and a Gladue report was requested. As of the date of the sentencing hearing, Ms. Thomas had accumulated 468 eligible days of pre-sentence custody.
The Facts
A. Circumstances of the Offence
[3] The following facts are admitted:
(i) During the early morning hours of January 25, 2014, Priscilla Thomas, her common-law spouse Jeffrey Munroe, and her sister Melissa Thomas were at her residence socializing in the living room of the apartment, after a night of alcohol and drug consumption. Eventually, her sister, Melissa Thomas, blacked out.
(ii) Priscilla Thomas’s son Justin Thomas (17 years old at the time), present in a bedroom in the same apartment, heard his mother yelling at Munroe to give back her engagement ring.
(iii) In the course of a physical fight with Jeffrey, in which Priscilla was injured, Priscilla Thomas stabbed Jeffrey Munroe three times in the left side of his chest with a knife, one wound in particular causing injury to the muscle of his heart.
(iv) 911 was called, resulting in police and ambulance attendance. First aid was provided to the victim at the apartment by emergency medical responders and Munroe was transported to hospital by ambulance.
(v) Priscilla Thomas said to the police at the scene, “I stabbed him.”
(vi) Munroe succumbed to his injury at the hospital.
(vii) Cause of death was noted by the pathologist to be a stab wound to the heart.
(viii) DNA analysis from the Centre of Forensic Sciences confirmed the victim’s blood to be in the following locations:
Lower front right of t-shirt from Priscilla Thomas;
Right hand of Priscilla Thomas;
Living room floor;
Mattress in the living room (location of victim upon EMS arrival);
Knife located in the bathroom.
(ix) Priscilla Thomas had fresh facial injuries, later determined by a CT scan at the hospital to include a mildly displaced nasal fracture.
(x) The victim’s Blood Alcohol level was noted to be between 365 and over 400 mg/100 ml.
B. Circumstances of the Offender
[4] Ms. Thomas is 41 years old and of Ojibway ancestry.
Presentence Report
Overview
[5] Ms. Thomas is a member of the Longlac #58 First Nation. She was born in Thunder Bay. Her parents separated before or shortly after her birth.
[6] Ms. Thomas was raised by her mother who abused alcohol. Child welfare was involved and Ms. Thomas was frequently placed with her maternal grandmother. When Ms. Thomas was approximately 10 years old the family relocated to Sioux Lookout. When Ms. Thomas was 14 years old, she returned to Thunder Bay and resided with an uncle. She met her first common-law spouse when she was around 15 or 16 years old and had her first son at the age of 17 and her second son at the age of 20. That common-law relationship lasted about 10 years. The relationship was characterized by alcohol abuse. When the couple separated, she left her sons in their father’s care. She described herself as a largely “absent mother” during their formative years.
[7] Ms. Thomas became involved in a second common-law relationship and had a son with that partner. That son is currently 15 years old. That relationship lasted approximately 13 years and her former spouse is still supportive. Although there was no domestic violence, there was alcohol abuse which led to Ms. Thomas attending residential treatment in March 2007.
[8] In 2012, Ms. Thomas met and became involved with Mr. Munroe. Ms. Thomas said that they “met when we were drunk” and states that the relationship was largely characterized by alcohol abuse. Ms. Thomas said that during the two-year relationship with Mr. Munroe she was either “hung over or drinking.” She said that Mr. Munroe hit her a few times. Ms. Thomas’s mother recalls that during the time that her daughter was with Mr. Munroe, she observed bruises on Ms. Thomas’s face and arms and was concerned about where the bruises came from.
[9] Ms. Thomas did not complete grade nine. Employment included working as a cook’s assistant and working in housekeeping at a remote mining location. She was let go from that position in 2011 when she attended work while intoxicated.
[10] Substance abuse and addiction has been a problem from her early teens. It led to the apprehension of her children and court ordered treatment in 1998. She voluntarily entered treatment in 2007 but relapsed. She had two convictions for impaired driving between 2000 and 2007.
[11] While in custody awaiting these charges, Ms. Thomas entered the Monarch Recovery Home in Sudbury in October 2015. She successfully completed the program and was discharged November 23, 2015. Her counsellor commented that Ms. Thomas arrived at the treatment facility ready to work hard on recovery and address personal issues. Upon discharge, her prognosis for long-term recovery was excellent.
[12] She was transferred to the Monarch Women’s Aftercare Centre thereafter. She presented as motivated but after about one week was hospitalized for seven days due to suicidal ideation relating to past trauma and grief. However, on December 22, 2015, she did not return to the facility and admitted to drinking alcohol and using marijuana. Because of her continued use of alcohol, she was discharged from the facility on January 14, 2016.
[13] Karen Cooke, another counsellor, was involved initially with Ms. Thomas in April 2007. The counselling focused on past childhood and adult trauma. The goal was to learn strategies to reduce her maladaptive coping skills in her life, namely, substance abuse, suicidal ideation and other self-harming behaviours.
[14] All professional and personal sources agree that Ms. Thomas has not been coping well since the death of Mr. Munroe. They describe her as “riddled with guilt, grief and is essentially single focused.”
[15] Records from the Thunder Bay Regional Health Science Centre reflect extensive prior involvement with mental health services. Suicide attempts are documented at 14 and 17 and involvement spiked in October 2014, after her arrest for this crime. She was admitted voluntarily on October 25, 2014 due to suicidal ideation with subsequent admissions in November and December 2014 and January and February 2015. These records reflect that she has depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and incredible guilt relating to the death of her partner.
[16] When on probation in the past she followed through with substance abuse assessment and community service work. In 2010, when convicted of assault, she complied with the conditions for her probation for one year and actively participated in rehabilitation programs for substance abuse.
[17] The probation officer confirms that both personal and professional sources report that Ms. Thomas has been tormented with profound and relentless grief and remorse since the current offence. The probation officer notes that Ms. Thomas will require supports with these issues in any disposition that the court imposes. Ms. Thomas acknowledges that she requires rehabilitation to address her chronic substance abuse issues and intensive therapy to delve into the issues that prevent her recovery.
Presentence Report Recommendations
[18] The probation officer recommends treatment such as the Algoma Treatment Remand Centre which provides addiction and anger management programs for women and includes Aboriginal focused programs. To be eligible, Ms. Thomas must sign a treatment agreement and actively participate. The probation officer notes that there are similar programs available in the federal custodial system.
Gladue Report
Overview
[19] The Gladue report writer interviewed Ms. Thomas for approximately five hours. She also interviewed Ms. Thomas’s mother, grandmother, sister, and former common-law spouse.
[20] Although registered with Long Lake #58 First Nation near Longlac Ontario, Ms. Thomas has not lived on the reserve during her lifetime. She grew up without any connection to that community. She was raised without learning about her Aboriginal cultural heritage and spiritual practices.
[21] Ms. Thomas’s childhood was impacted by uncertainty as to the identity of her father. She said that her father did not accept her as his own child until she was about six years old. She had no steady father figure in her life since birth. She was raised at times by her mother and at times by her grandmother. When she was with her mother, she was often neglected because of her mother’s drinking and preoccupation with current boyfriends. Ms. Thomas and her siblings were placed in care for about six months when she was three years old. Ms. Thomas says that, “for a long time, I thought my grandmother was my mom because she took care of me a lot: she showed me lots of affection, protected me and took really good care of me.”
[22] While in elementary school, Ms. Thomas experienced racism from other students and, most regrettably, racism from a teacher. She started high school in Sioux Lookout but dropped out in grade nine. She started drinking around the same time. She said that there were consistent drinking parties during the time that she lived with her mother. One of her mother’s boyfriends had sex with one of Ms. Thomas’s 13-year-old friends who was passed out. That boyfriend was convicted and spent time in jail but Ms. Thomas’s mother “took him back.” That same friend died tragically in a house fire at the age of 14. Eventually, Ms. Thomas moved to Thunder Bay when she was 16 and lived with an uncle. The subsequent family history is as reported in the presentence report.
[23] Ms. Thomas was significantly affected by the death of her uncle in 2013. Her former common-law spouse observed that Ms. Thomas drank heavily after her uncle’s death and that they subsequently split up.
[24] Ms. Thomas’s first suicide attempt was at age 13 or 14 when she overdosed on pills. She said that she was resenting her mother and wanted her to see her pain. Ms. Thomas’s friends called 911 and she was hospitalized. Nothing changed after the suicide attempt. Her second suicide attempt occurred later in her teens, again related to drinking and despair.
[25] Ms. Thomas’s third suicide attempt was after Mr. Munroe was stabbed. She said that “I went off the wall then. I stab myself and cut my wrists. I stabbed myself in the hip area where (Mr. Monroe’s) wound was.… I really wanted to die.”
[26] Ms. Thomas said this:
I felt like I was putting myself on a death sentence. Dealing with Jeff’s death and court. It took me three days to realize he was actually dead. I heard it on the radio, the news, and read in the paper. I was in shock. I had black eyes and was bruised. Sometimes I still can’t imagine I would do something like that. After he died I thought it was the end of my drinking days. That someone dying because of my drinking would stop me. But it did not, I kept drinking. That makes me feel sick; self-loathing. I did not want him to die. When I was out on bail I drank because it was all around – it was only way I knew how to deal with it. I do not know how to deal with anything that goes wrong. I just drink. I drink with my family, my mom and my sister drinking buddies. Me and Jeff liked to drink, it is how we spent most of our time.
[27] The Gladue report writer reports that several interviewees agreed that Ms. Thomas needs counselling for grief and depression and treatment for drug and alcohol addiction. She notes Ms. Thomas’s success at Monarch Recovery Services but the subsequent relapse. The writer also notes that Ms. Thomas is on a waitlist for Aduhyaun Inc.’s Nekenaan Second Stage Housing in Toronto.
Recommendations
[28] Should noncustodial options be considered, the Gladue report writer recommended attendance again at the Monarch Recovery residential treatment program in Sudbury and that Ms. Thomas continue to pursue entry into the Native Horizons Treatment Centre.
[29] With respect to custodial options, the following recommendations were made for provincial facilities:
that Ms. Thomas attend the Thunder Bay Correctional Centre. She has experienced success in accessing programming and that Ms. Thomas attend the Algoma Treatment and Remand Centre where she can access Understanding the Journey and the Healing Journey a Women’s Intensive Program.
[30] With respect to custodial options, the following recommendations were made for federal facilities:
that Ms. Thomas access the Okimaw Ochi Healing Lodge for Aboriginal women in Maple Creek Saskatchewan and Ms. Thomas access the Willow Cree Healing Centre in Duck Lake, Saskatchewan which also promotes the healing process based on Aboriginal culture.
[31] In addition to the offences described in the presentence and Gladue reports, Ms. Thomas also had convictions for breaching recognizances in April 2015 and January 2016.
Statement of Ms. Thomas
[32] Ms. Thomas provided a letter to the Gladue report writer which was read in court by her counsel. Ms. Thomas wrote:
I am writing this letter because I would like to court to know how this ordeal has changed my life. I feel I have to express myself. Jeffrey was a special person who a lot of people love. He was a son a father brother uncle a nephew and a cousin. He is also the man I wanted to spend the rest of my life with. I believe that no father or mother should have to bury a child. I know Jeffrey was smart and a kind thoughtful human being. He loved to work and go for long walks. The long walks we had are good memories I have of him. When Jeffrey passed someone inside of me died that spark of life had went to total blackness. After being arested it took me a few days to realize that he was gone. I went into shock. I was in denial. I could not believe or understand what had happened. I was truly living in a hell on earth. The thought of me hurting the man I love traumatized me. I was not myself and I know that I’ll never be the same for a long while or maybe for the rest of my life. I feel that I do not deserve happiness because of the grief and sadnes that this ordeal has cause his family. I am vary remorseful I feel vary sad for his father I knew that they were close. Peopl who see me now may believe that I am happy but inside I feel scared, I live in fear.
After pleading guilty to manslaughter I felt less than human I felt a part of me leave something good had left me. I know that there is no majic pill or any amount of people who may tell me I’ll be alright and put back together. I’ll have to live with what happened for a long while maybe for the rest of my life. My life is at a standstill and closed ff. I had these feelings when I was out on bail. Even though I was able to have a coffee and eat when I felt like it I could not help but feel lost, incomplete and insecure. I had inprisoned myself. Being in jail and losing Jeffrey makes me relize how short life can be. I came to understand that I took my own life for granted. I have been told that time heals all wounds and that forgiving myself will take time. It has been 28 months and in my case I feel I have not reached a milestone yet.
July 05/2016
Priscilla Thomas
C. Impact on the Victim and/or Community
[33] Seven victim impact statements were filed or read into the record on behalf of them, the seven family members: Inna Commanda, grandmother; Raven Monroe, cousin; Gregory Monroe, uncle; Elizabeth Willis, aunt; Candace Monroe, sister; Jodi Albany, cousin; and Elizabeth White.
[34] The thread linking all of the statements is that this sudden, criminal death has had a significant impact upon the lives of those who knew and loved Mr. Munroe. I am grateful for the insight offered by these victim impact statements.
Legal Parameters
[35] The following Criminal Code provisions apply:
Purpose and Principles of Sentencing
718 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 by imposing just sanctions that have one or more of the following objectives:
(a) to denounce unlawful conduct and the harm done to victims or to the community that is caused by unlawful conduct;
(b) to deter the offender and other persons from committing offences;
(c) to separate offenders from society, where necessary;
(d) to assist in rehabilitating offenders;
(e) to provide reparations for harm done to victims or to the community; and
(f) to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgment of the harm done to victims or to the community. R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 718; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 155; 1995, c. 22, s. 6; 2015, c. 13, s. 23.
Fundamental principle
718.1 A sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 156; 1995, c. 22, s. 6.
Other sentencing principles
718.2 A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles:
(a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender, and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing,
(ii) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused the offender’s spouse or common-law partner,
… shall be deemed to be aggravating circumstances;
(b) a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances;
(c) an offender should not be deprived of liberty, if less restrictive sanctions may be appropriate in the circumstances; and
(d) all available sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to victims or to the community should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders. 1995, c. 22, s. 6; 1997, c. 23, s. 17; 2000, c. 12, s. 95; 2001, c. 32, s. 44(F), c. 41, s. 20; 2005, c. 32, s. 25; 2012, c. 29, s. 2; 2015, c. 13, s. 24, c. 23, s. 16.
[36] Section 718.2(e) requires that sentencing determinations take into account the unique circumstances of Aboriginal peoples (R. v. Gladue, 1999 CanLII 679 (SCC), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688).
[37] In Gladue, the Supreme Court of Canada stated:
81 The analysis for sentencing Aboriginal offenders, as for all offenders, must be holistic and designed to achieve a fit sentence in the circumstances. There is no single test that a judge can apply in order to determine the sentence. The sentencing judge is required to take into account all of the surrounding circumstances regarding the offence, the offender, the victims, and the community, including the unique circumstances of the offender as an aboriginal person. Sentencing must proceed with sensitivity to and understanding of the difficulties Aboriginal people have faced with both the criminal justice system and society at large. When evaluating these circumstances in light of the aims and principles of sentencing as set out in Part XXIII of the Criminal Code and in the jurisprudence, the judge must strive to arrive at a sentence which is just and appropriate in the circumstances. By means of s. 718.2(e), sentencing judges have been provided with a degree of flexibility and discretion to consider in appropriate circumstances alternative sentences to incarceration which are appropriate for the aboriginal offender and community and yet comply with the mandated principles and purpose of sentencing. In this way, effect may be given to the aboriginal emphasis upon healing and restoration of both the victim and the offender. [Emphasis added.]
Positions of the Crown and Defence
[38] Counsel for Ms. Thomas relies upon R. v. Gladue, 1999 CanLII 679 (SCC), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688, in submitting that Ms. Thomas should receive a sentence of three years imprisonment or less.
[39] Ms. Gladue pleaded guilty to manslaughter for the killing of her common-law spouse and was sentenced to three years imprisonment. The circumstances appear more culpable than the facts in this case. Ms. Gladue was described as the aggressor and from her remarks, before and after the stabbing, it was clear that she intended to harm her common-law spouse. They had been arguing over his infidelity. She stabbed him once and he fled. She followed with a large knife and stabbed him once, penetrating his heart. The Crown sought a sentence between three and five years’ imprisonment. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the three year sentence was not “unreasonable.” Ms. Gladue was not in custody prior to sentence.
[40] Counsel for Ms. Thomas also relies upon a decision from the Manitoba Court of Appeal, R. v. Young, 1998 CanLII 17787 (MB CA), [1998] M.J. No. 495. Young is an Aboriginal woman who stabbed her aunt fatally in an altercation. The intoxication of the victim, her resistance to treatment, and the limited treatment facilities in the community contributed to her death. The Court of Appeal imposed a sentence of two years less a day plus three years supervised probation. Aggravating factors included prior convictions for assault. The court noted that the sentence could offer the accused the treatment that the experts recommended was necessary to deal with her needs.
[41] If a sentence of less than two years is imposed, counsel for Ms. Thomas recommends the maximum period of probation of three years to provide for the supervision and direction that Ms. Thomas requires for rehabilitation.
[42] The Crown seeks a greater period of imprisonment and, among others, relies upon three decisions which are similar to this case. R. v. Masakayash, 2015 ONCJ 655, involved a stabbing where murder was reduced to manslaughter by reason of provocation. Ms. Masakayash was Aboriginal with significant Gladue considerations. Both counsel submitted that the range for sentence was six to eight years imprisonment and the sentence imposed was six years.
[43] The Crown also relied upon R. v. C.M.A., 2005 YKSC 58. C.M.A. was a 27-year-old Aboriginal woman who stabbed and killed her partner with a butcher knife. Like this case, the stabbing occurred following a drunken argument. Like Ms. Thomas, a mitigating circumstance was that C.M.A. was genuinely remorseful and had taken some responsibility for the unlawful act and her rehabilitation. Like Ms. Thomas, the aggravating factors included the fact that this was an assault on her partner. The sentencing judge determined that five years was an appropriate sentence and, after giving credit for pretrial custody, sentenced C.M.A. to a further three years imprisonment.
[44] The Crown also relies upon R. v. Laurence, 2013 ONCJ 692, in which Ms. Laurence stabbed her spouse while intoxicated after a violent altercation. The sentencing judge accepted a joint submission of six years imprisonment. While Ms. Laurence was not Aboriginal, she had a difficult upbringing. She had alcohol and mental health issues and had been physically abused by her father. The sentencing judge accepted the joint sentence of six years imprisonment before credit for pretrial custody.
[45] The Crown, like the Defence, suggests that if a sentence of less than two years is imposed the maximum period of probation should be ordered for the supervision and direction that Ms. Thomas requires for rehabilitation.
Reasons and Sentence
[46] Gladue instructs that effect is to be given to the Aboriginal emphasis upon healing and restoration. Ms. Thomas does not have to be isolated to keep others safe. Indeed, the person most at risk to harm from Ms. Thomas is Ms. Thomas.
[47] In imposing sentence, I have considered the objectives of denunciation and deterrence and, in keeping with Gladue, rehabilitation. I am guided by the fundamental principle that the sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. I recognize that the victim was a spouse and that this is an aggravating factor.
[48] A custodial sentence is necessary to reflect the objectives of denunciation and deterrence, the gravity of the offence, and the aggravating factor of spousal violence. Healing and rehabilitation can also be addressed by continuing with the in custody programming that Ms. Thomas has accessed to date.
[49] Ms. Thomas has already been in custody for almost one and a half years. As of today, Ms. Thomas has accumulated 535 days of eligible presentence custody. Credit at 1.5 days is conceded as appropriate by the Crown. That is equivalent to 803 days or almost two years and two and a half months in custody.
[50] Please stand Ms. Thomas.
[51] Ms. Thomas, after considering all the relevant factors and sentencing principles, I conclude that the appropriate sentence in this case is four years and that, therefore, with credit for pre-sentence custody, the effective sentence shall be an additional 657 days in custody in a provincial institution followed by three years of probation. I recommend that you attend the Thunder Bay Correctional Centre for programming and, if it is deemed appropriate, that you also attend the Algoma Treatment and Remand Centre where you can participate in the Understanding the Journey and the Healing Journey, a Women’s Intensive Program.
[52] In addition to the statutory terms of probation, Ms. Thomas, you are to report to a probation officer as directed and attend and participate in such psychological and/or psychiatric assessment and programming as directed by your probation officer. I am not ordering that you abstain from consuming or possessing alcohol in light of your history to date. While I hope that you, with assistance, will defeat this dependence I will not criminalize that behaviour.
[53] As a further consequence of your conviction, ancillary orders are mandated by the Criminal Code. Pursuant to section 109(1)(a), you are prohibited from possessing any firearm, crossbow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, and explosives substance for a period of 10 years. Further, you are required to submit a sample of your DNA to the DNA Data Bank. Pursuant to s. 737, you must also, within one year, pay a victim surcharge of $200.00.
[54] You are, therefore, sentenced to a further 657 days in custody followed by three years supervised probation.
“Original signed by”____
The Hon. Mr. Justice W.D. Newton
Released: December 19, 2016
CITATION: R. v. Thomas, 2016 ONSC 7944
COURT FILE NO.: CR-14-0109
DATE: 2016-12-19
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
- and -
PRISCILLA LYNN THOMAS
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
Newton J.
Released: December 19, 2016
/sab