Her Majesty the Queen v. Jordan Jackson
COURT FILE NO.: CR17-085
DATE: 2018/06/13
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Plaintiff
- and -
JORDAN JACKSON
Defendant
COUNSEL: D. McCaig, for the Crown G. Clark, for the Defendant
HEARD AND DELIVERED ORALLY ON: June 13, 2018
BEFORE: Ellies J.
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] Mr. Jackson pleaded guilty on December 7, 2017 to four charges under the Criminal Code, namely:
(1) attempt obstruct justice (s. 139(2));
(2) aggravated assault on Mathieu Brais (s. 268);
(3) attempt murder of Adam Mascioli (s. 239(1)(b)); and
(4) attempt murder of Robert Ransom.
[2] He admitted that on May 14, 2017 he entered the home of Adam Mascioli where he encountered Mr. Mascioli, Mr. Brais, Mr. Ransom and two other young people, namely Lexi Bouchard and Mr. Ransom’s younger brother, Kevin Ransom.
[3] Mr. Jackson had previously approached Mr. Mascioli in an effort to get him to change what he had told the police about a home invasion in which Mr. Mascioli and Mr. Brais had been victims and in which Mr. Jackson’s younger brother had been implicated as a perpetrator. Mr. Mascioli had refused to do so.
[4] When Mr. Jackson first attended the Mascioli residence, he sat down in a chair for a short period of time and had a limited conversation with those present. He appeared to have been drinking.
[5] At one point, Mr. Brais went to lay down in an adjacent room. Mr. Jackson then attended that room, stood over him, and began to stab him with a knife in the head and to repeatedly punch him. Mr. Brais managed to escape. He ran into the adjacent room and yelled at the others to alert them that he was being stabbed. He then jumped out of a second story window. Ms. Bouchard was also able to flee the residence and she and Mr. Brais ran down the street and contacted police.
[6] Immediately after attacking Mr. Brais, Mr. Jackson returned to Mr. Mascioli and Mr. Ransom and attacked them. He accused them of being snitches and proceeded to stab them both repeatedly.
[7] During the attack, the younger Mr. Ransom managed to hide in a closet, where he overheard his brother screaming for help and Mr. Jackson threatening to kill his brother and Mr. Mascioli for being snitches.
[8] Mr. Jackson was arrested when North Bay Police officers attended the scene. He has been in custody with respect to these offences since his arrest that night.
[9] Mr. Jackson first appeared before me for sentencing on March 27, 2018. However, the matter was adjourned then and has been adjourned on a few occasions since for reasons that are not important except to the extent that they have added to the length of his pre-sentence incarceration.
[10] The Crown submits that a period of incarceration of six to eight years is appropriate in the circumstances of this case. On behalf of the Crown, Mr. Wood submits that a sentence at the higher end of that range is warranted based, among other things, on the brutal nature of the offences and the serious impact that they have had on the victims.
[11] On behalf of the accused, Mr. Clark submits that a sentence at the low end of a range of three to five years is more appropriate, having regard to Mr. Jackson’s disadvantaged Aboriginal background and certain mitigating factors, such as Mr. Jackson’s willingness to resolve the matter early by way of pleas of guilty.
[12] Section 718.2 of the Criminal Code lists a number of aggravating and mitigating circumstances to be considered by a court in determining a fit and just sentence. There are a number of aggravating circumstances in this case. As Mr. Wood submitted on behalf of the Crown, probably the most aggravating circumstance is the devastating impact of Mr. Jackson’s attacks on his victims.
[13] The attacks by Mr. Jordan caused serious physical injury to a number of the victims, especially Mr. Mascioli. He was stabbed 12 times. He suffered severe injuries to his kidneys, liver and lung. He had to be resuscitated once during the course of his initial treatment and had to return to the hospital one week after first being discharged. Overall, he was in the hospital for approximately six weeks.
[14] Mr. Ramsom sustained multiple wounds to his hands and forearms as well as a laceration to his head. In addition, he sustained a stab wound on his right leg that left a piece of the knife embedded in the area of his knee. He was unable to walk for six weeks following surgery to remove the blade. He has been unable to work.
[15] Mr. Brais sustained lacerations to the right side of his head, his right palm and his left forearm as a result of the stab wounds. In addition, he was injured when he jumped from the second story of the building in which the group was attacked.
[16] The physical injuries sustained by these victims continue to affect them. Mr. Mascioli suffers ongoing neck pain, back pain, chronic headaches, random vomiting and trouble breathing. He is unable to do any heavy lifting. He sustained a loss of feeling in his left foot and leg.
[17] Mr. Ransom cannot write and does not have the full use of either hand.
[18] All of the individuals in the apartment suffered ongoing psychiatric or psychological injuries, as well. The victim impact of Mr. Mascioli and his mother poignantly set out the fear in which they live every day.
[19] In short, Mr. Jackson’s attacks have had a devastating long-term impact on all of the victims and their immediate families.
[20] Among the mitigating circumstances present in this case are Mr. Jackson’s young age, the lack of any criminal record for violence, and the fact that Mr. Jackson sought to resolve this matter by way of pleas of guilty beginning early in the criminal process.
[21] Also mitigating, in my view, are the steps towards rehabilitation that Mr. Jackson has taken while in custody. Mr. Jackson completed his high-school credits and attained his high-school diploma while awaiting sentence.
[22] In addition to listing a number of mitigating and aggravating circumstances, s. 718.2 also directs the court to consider all available sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to victims for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders.
[23] On behalf of Mr. Jackson, Mr. Clark concedes that a penitentiary sentence of at least three years, in addition to the time that Mr. Jackson has already served, is warranted in this case given the serious nature of the offences. However, he asks the court to keep the sentence at the low end of a range of three to five years on the basis of the approach mandated by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Gladue, 1999 CanLII 679 (SCC), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688 and R. v. Ipeelee, 2012 SCC 13.
[24] I acknowledge the comments made by the Supreme Court of Canada in Ipeelee, at para. 84, that the principles discussed in Gladue are as applicable to serious offences as they are to less serious ones. Nonetheless, the reality is that, where an offence reaches the level of seriousness that these offences have reached, in the circumstances in which these offences were committed, the sentence imposed on any offender, Aboriginal or non-Aboriginal, must be one which satisfies the court that the public will be protected while the offender is rehabilitated, if he can be.
[25] The Gladue report prepared in this case does a good job of explaining the effect of his Aboriginal background on Mr. Jackson and makes a direct link to his appearance here quite obvious.
[26] The report does not, however, provide us with much in the way of options to address Mr. Jackson’s issues in a more culturally sensitive and, perhaps more effective, way while still ensuring the safety of members of the general public, other than by separating him from society by means of a significant prison term.
[27] Section 718 of the Criminal Code sets out the fundamental purpose of sentencing as the protection of society and the contribution to respect for the law. That section sets out the objectives of sentencing, including denunciation, deterrence, rehabilitation, reparation and the promotion of a sense of responsibility in offenders. All of these principles are in play here. However, in my view, one principle is of particular importance in this case, namely the protection of the public.
[28] At present, because of his alcohol abuse problem and, potentially, the effect of his mother’s consumption of alcohol when she was pregnant with Mr. Jackson, Mr. Jackson represents a serious threat to the safety of others. As Mr. Clark pointed out in his submissions, these very serious and deadly attacks resulted when Mr. Jackson simply “lost control” after drinking. I accept that there was no long-term planning. However, that means that Mr. Jackson presently poses a threat that no one may see coming, including himself.
[29] While Mr. Jackson has demonstrated the potential for rehabilitation in terms of his education, there is no evidence of the potential for rehabilitation with respect to his alcohol abuse and the effects of the Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder from which he may be suffering. Unless and until these problems can be successfully addressed, the public must be protected from Mr. Jackson’s potential volatility. In my view, that can only be done by a sentence at the longer end of the range suggested by the Crown.
[30] Please stand Mr. Jackson.
[31] For these reasons, I sentence you to a period of imprisonment of eight years, less pre-sentence custody, at the enhanced rate of 1.5:1, on counts #5 and 6, concurrent. I sentence you to a period of three years imprisonment on count #4 and one year imprisonment on count #1, also concurrent.
[32] According to counsel, you have served 396 days in custody awaiting sentence. At the enhanced rate, that equates to 594 days. Therefore, you will serve a further six years and 136 days in custody. In addition, the following ancillary orders will be made.
[33] First, there will be an order under s. 109 of the Criminal Code, prohibiting you from possessing any firearm or other thing mentioned in that section for life. I have considered Mr. Clark’s submission that this period should be reduced as a result of your Aboriginal heritage. However, as the Gladue report makes clear, you have not participated in the traditional hunting activities of your Aboriginal background and I am not prepared to allow you to possess a firearm again in your life given the circumstances of the offences of which you have been convicted.
[34] As well, an order will issue that you provide a sample of your DNA with respect to the two primary designated offences of attempt murder and the secondary designated offence of aggravated assault.
[35] In addition, an order will be made under s. 743.21 of the Criminal Code that you not communicate during the period of your sentence with Robert Ransom, Kevin Ransom, Adam Mascioli, Mathieu Brais, or Caroline Mascioli.
[36] Finally, you shall be provided with eight years in which to pay the victim fine surcharge.
Ellies J.
Released: June 13, 2018
COURT FILE NO.: CR17-085
DATE: 2018/06/13
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Plaintiff
– and –
JORDAN JACKSON
Defendant
REASONS FOR decision
Ellies J.
Released: June 13, 2018