COURT FILE NO.: CR-18-DV7063

DATE: 2021/10/05

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N:

Her Majesty the Queen

– and –

Ian Tait

François Dulude for Her Majesty the Queen

Self-represented

HEARD: September 9, 2021 Via Videoconference

Pursuant to s. 486.4 of the Criminal Code, there is a continuing order in place making it an offence for any person to publish information that might lead to disclosure of the identity of the Complainant.

reasons for decision - sentencing

o’bonsawin J.

Overview

[1] On June 11, 2021, I found Mr. Tait guilty of two charges of mischief as per s. 430(4) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 (“Code”), for having damaged the Complainant’s wall and flowerpot and having thrown her jewelry box against her bedroom wall. I also found Mr. Tait not guilty of three charges of sexual assault.

[2] This matter was to proceed in person on September 27, 2021 for me to provide my sentencing decision. Mr. Tait arrived late via Zoom and advised he was in Calgary for work. He had been directed by Trial Management to attend in person. Consequently, his sentencing hearing was moved to today’s date.

[3] By way of background, at the time of the incidents, Mr. Tait worked as an arborist. The Complainant was a lab technician specialising in phlebotomy. They met in June/July 2017 when the Complainant was working in a drug and alcohol testing clinic and Mr. Tait went in for testing. They officially started dating on July 20, 2017. In the trial decision, I described their very difficult and tumultuous relationship.

Circumstances of Mr. Tait

[4] Mr. Tait is 37 years old. He was married in July 2019, however, he is currently separated from his wife. In all, Mr. Tait has 5 children aged 15, 12, 10, 1.5 years old and 3 months old. Although he does not believe he suffers from alcohol addiction, there was overwhelming evidence at trial that he has such an addiction. I have not been advised whether Mr. Tait has family support. The week before the parties provided me with their submissions regarding the appropriate sentence for Mr. Tait, he began a new job as a power line technician. He advised me that he would work twelve days on and two days off. I was later provided with a letter dated September 16, 2021, from Midlite Powerline Construction. The Payroll Administrator for this company confirmed that Mr. Tait has been employed as a Journeyman Power Lines Technician since August 31, 2021, and he is guaranteed 40 hours of work per week. Midlite Construction Ltd. is in Fort McMurray, Alberta.

[5] Mr. Tait has an unrelated charge on his criminal record for driving under the influence and failure to stop at the scene of an accident from 2016.

Impact on the Complainant

[6] The Complainant read her Victim Impact Statement before the parties made their submissions regarding the appropriate sentence for Mr. Tait. She advised how her relationship with Mr. Tait negatively impacted her life; she has flashbacks and nightmares. The Complainant feels she was emotionally, mentally, verbally, and physically abused by Mr. Tait. This led to her grades slipping in college and the need to attend counselling and take prescribed medication that, at time, led to drowsiness.

[7] When the Complainant sees the damage, Mr. Tait inflicted to her home that she adores, it is a constant reminder of his abusive behaviour towards her. She fears she will not be able to get back to her old self. The Complainant has a seven-year-old daughter that she co-parents with her ex-partner. The Complainant advised that her daughter has also been hurt by having to witness her destructive relationship with Mr. Tait.

Other Victim Impact Statements

[8] Mr. G. filed a Victim Impact Statement. He described the Complainant as his best friend who he has lived with since 2005. Mr. G. lived with the Complainant at the time the latter and Mr. Tait were in a relationship. Mr. G. has seen the effect of this relationship on the Complainant. He also noted the negative impact the decision from this court has had on the Complainant. After the decision, the Complainant suffered from increased bouts of depression and anxiety.

[9] The Complainant’s mother filed a Victim Impact Statement. She expressed her concerns towards the Complainant’s emotional/psychological pain and distress regarding the charges against Mr. Tait. Her mother described how the Complainant has experienced depression and Mr. Tait left her feeling vulnerable, fearful, and numb.

[10] Ms. O. is the Complainant’s best friend; they met through Mr. Tait. Ms. O. later cut ties with Mr. Tait but continued her friendship with the Complainant. Ms. O. described the Complainant as a bubbly and smart person. However, Mr. Tait’s actions changed the Complainant from a strong woman to a woman with low self esteem.

[11] Lastly, Mr. T., a friend of the Complainant, provided a Victim Impact Statement. Although Mr. T. did not know the Complainant prior to the events in question, he described how the Complainant’s demeanor changed as the date to the trial loomed closer. During the trial, the Complainant became more distant and less social.

Position of the Parties

[12] Regarding the position of the parties, Mr. Tait argues he should not receive any “jail time sentence”. Instead, he believes he should receive probation without having to report to a probation officer. Mr. Tait finds it appropriate to impose a no contact provision with the Complainant. He is also willing to attend an anger management program.

[13] On the other hand, the Crown seeks the following:

• a custodial sentence to be served either in the community or in jail;
• a probation period of twelve months during which Mr. Tait must successfully complete an anger management program and counselling for his alcoholism issues;
• a mandatory DNA order;
• a s. 109 of the Code weapons prohibition for a period of 10 years; and
• a no contact order.

Factors to be Considered with Regard to Sentencing

[14] I will review the factors to be considered regarding sentencing. The sentencing principles according to s. 718 of the Code are denunciation, deterrence, rehabilitation, and the protection of society. More specifically, according to s. 718 of the Code, the purpose and principles of sentencing are to:

• denounce unlawful conduct and the harm done to victims or to the community;
• deter the offender and other persons from committing offences;
• separate offenders from society, where necessary;
• assist in rehabilitating offenders;
• provide reparations for harm done to victims or to the community; and
• promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgment of the harm done to victims or to the community.

[15] Section 718.1 of the Code provides that a sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender.

[16] Section 718.2 of the Code lists other sentencing principles that are relevant in this matter, such as:

• evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused his intimate partner or that the offense had a significant impact on the victim are considered aggravating factors;
• a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances;
• where consecutive sentences are imposed, the combined sentence should not be unduly long or harsh;
• an offender should not be deprived of liberty, if less restrictive sanctions may be appropriate in the circumstances; and
• all available sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to the victims or to the community should be considered for all offenders.

Mitigating and Aggravating Factors

[17] There are no significant mitigating factors in Mr. Tait’s case. He has not shown any remorse for his actions. Mr. Tait has a criminal record although it is somewhat dated and does not involve violence. The aggravating factors in this matter include the fact the charges stem from an intimate relationship between Mr. Tait and the Complainant and his actions have had a significant impact on her as demonstrated by her Victim Impact Statement and the Victim Impact Statements of others.

Analysis

[18] The parties did not refer me to any caselaw. However, R. v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64, [2015] 3 S.C.R. 1089, of the Supreme Court provided the following helpful guiding points that can be used in this matter:

• the inquiry must focus on the fundamental principle of proportionality;
• the trial judge must properly weigh the various principles and objectives of s. 718; and
• sentencing is an inherently individualized process.

[19] At the time in question, Mr. Tait and the Complainant were in an intimate relationship fraught with difficulties. This was supported by the significant text messages between them that were admitted into evidence at trial. Mr. Tait was verbally abusive to the Complainant; he threatened suicide and manipulated her constantly. The photographs submitted of the items broken in the Complainant’s home also show the destruction caused by Mr. Tait in fits of anger. Furthermore, Mr. Tait does not have any insight into his issues with alcohol although he seems to recognize he has significant anger management issues since he is willing to attend an anger management program.

[20] Mr. Tait is still a relatively young man. I hope that with some assistance to deal with his alcohol addiction and anger management issues, he will gain insight into his behaviours and return to the community in better stead.

Final Disposition

[21] In coming to my decision, I have kept in mind the sentencing principles, the mitigating and aggravating factors, and all the circumstances of this matter.

[22] Consequently, I proceed with the final disposition. I will begin with Count #1, mischief, as per s. 430(4) of the Code. I sentence Mr. Tait to fifteen days of imprisonment.

[23] Regarding Count #2, mischief, as per s. 430(4), I sentence Mr. Tait to fifteen days to be served consecutively to the sentence on Count #1.

[24] As a result, Mr. Tait’s total sentence is for a period of 30 days.

[25] In addition, following his release from jail, Mr. Tait will be on probation for a period of twelve months during which time Mr. Tait must report weekly to a probation officer. In addition, he must successfully complete an anger management program and counselling for his issues with alcohol.

[26] I also make the following ancillary orders:

• a mandatory DNA order pursuant to s. 487.051(1) of the Code;
• a weapons prohibition for a period of ten years as per s. 109 of the Code; and
• a non-communication order: Mr. Tait is not to have any contact or communication directly or indirectly with the Complainant and/or her daughter as per s. 743.21 of the Code.

Justice M. O’Bonsawin

Released: October 5, 2021

R. v. Ian Tait, 2021 ONSC 6311

COURT FILE NO.: CR-18-DV7063

DATE: 2021/10/05

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N:

Her Majesty the Queen

– and –

Ian Tait

reasons for decision

sentencing

O’Bonsawin J.

Released: October 5, 2021