Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CJ 18-9533 DATE: 2023/09/27 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN: HIS MAJESTY THE KING – and – AGER HASAN Accused

Counsel: Brendan Thomas and Ashley Warne, Counsel for the Crown Scott Reid, Counsel for the Accused

HEARD: September 6, 7, and 8, 2023

Reasons for Period of Parole Ineligibility

G. E. Taylor, J.

Introduction

[1] Ager Hasan was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder in the death of Melinda Vasilije.

[2] Upon arraignment, Ager Hasan sought to enter a plea of guilty to manslaughter, but the plea was rejected by the Crown.

[3] Pursuant to s. 745.4 of the Criminal Code, it is necessary to decide the number of years of his life sentence of imprisonment that Ager Hasan will be required to serve before being eligible for parole.

Facts

[4] The murder occurred just after midnight on April 28, 2017 at Melinda Vasilije’s apartment which she shared with a roommate. The roommate was not at home at the time of the murder.

[5] Ager Hasan and Melinda Vasilije began dating in February 2016. The relationship was turbulent with many breakups and reconciliations. Melinda Vasilije terminated the relationship in early April 2017. Ager Hasan refused to accept that the relationship was over. Throughout the month of April there were hundreds of text messages sent by Ager Hasan to Melinda Vasilije imploring her to reconcile.

[6] On April 3, 2017, Ager Hasan was charged with breaking into Melinda Vasilije’s apartment and assaulting Anna Manda, Melinda Vasilije’s roommate and her brother, Victor Manda. Ager Hasan was released on a recognizance which included terms that he not enter the Region of Waterloo, except for attending court or meeting with his lawyer, and to have no communication with Melinda Vasilije and others.

[7] The cause of death was multiple stab wounds to the neck and chest. Two stab wounds to the chest were fatal and three stab wounds to the neck were possibly fatal. There were 47 stab wounds in total.

[8] Ager Hasan testified that he went to Melinda Vasilije’s apartment on the night in question to rekindle the romantic relationship that she had terminated approximately one month earlier. He said they were working things out. She walked him to his car and they exchanged a lingering kiss. She returned to the apartment. Ager Hasan followed her and she invited him in. During their conversation Ager Hasan admitted that he had not been faithful during the relationship. Melinda Vasilije became very upset and attacked him with a knife. He defended himself by grabbing the knife. He also grabbed a knife, which was within his reach, for the purpose of defending himself. Ager Hasan testified to stabbing Melinda Vasilije twice, once in the face and once in the shoulder. He then blacked out. His next memory was of seeing blood everywhere. A surveillance video captured Ager Hasan running from the area of the apartment, entering his car and driving away shortly after 2 a.m.

[9] Ager Hasan said he did not intend to kill Melinda Vasilije. Alternatively, he relied on the partial defence of provocation.

[10] I reject Ager Hasan’s testimony that he reacted to an attack on him by Melinda Vasilije. Although Dr. Kocovski, the forensic pathologist, admitted in cross examination that some of the superficial wounds to Ager Hasan’s hands might be defensive wounds, I accept her testimony that those wounds were more likely offensive injuries. I also reject the testimony of Ager Hasan that he blacked out and did not intend to kill Melinda Vasilije.

[11] On April 28, 2017, at 5:44 a.m., Ager Hasan entered the United States at the Peace Bridge border crossing. On July 11, 2017, Ager Hasan was arrested in Baird County, Texas. He was extradited to Canada arriving in Ontario on January 5, 2018.

Victim Impact Statements

[12] A number of Victim Impact Statements were read and/or filed as exhibits. They speak to the devastating impact of Melinda Vasilije’s death. The consequences of this tragic event will continue indefinitely.

[13] From the Victim Impact Statements, it is apparent that Melinda Vasilije was a special individual with many positive attributes. Her death and the manner in which she died have and will continue to cause profound and continuing grief to those who knew and loved her.

Positions of the Parties

[14] The Crown advocates for the period of parole ineligibility of 18 years.

[15] The position of the defence is that the period of parole ineligibility should be set at between 14 and 15 years.

Factors to Be Considered

[16] Section 745.4 of the Criminal Code requires that when considering whether to impose a period of parole ineligibility in excess of 10 years, the following factors are to be considered:

a) The character of the offender; b) The nature of the offence and the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence; and, c) Any recommendation made by the jury pursuant to section 745.2 of the Criminal Code.

Character of the Offender

[17] Ager Hasan was born on October 4, 1992 in Iraq. When he was seven or eight years old his family immigrated to Canada. He suffered abuse at the hands of his parents and uncles. He was severely assaulted by several adults when he tried to protect his brother.

[18] Ager Hasan has no criminal record although he was facing charges of assault and break and enter at the time of the murder.

[19] Ager Hasan was 24 years of age at the time of the offence. He was living with his mother. There was no evidence presented at trial or on sentencing about his employment. There was some vague suggestion that he was self-employed or working with his father but the nature of such employment was not specified.

[20] After leaving the country Ager Hasan immediately began to attempt to create evidence to bolster his defence. He photographed and video recorded the superficial cuts to his hands which he maintained were defensive wounds suffered during the attack by Melinda Vasilije.

[21] Ager Hasan sent a text message to Melinda Vasilije at 3:39 a.m. on April 28, 2017 at which time he knew she was, in all likelihood, dead. The message read: “Nice seeing you tonight glad we worked things out!! You better have deleted that fucking Dorche bag lol. Anyways see you soon.” This was an attempt to deflect blame from himself and towards another person.

Letters from Family and Friends

[22] Many family members, friends and acquaintances submitted letters of support. These letters speak positively about Ager Hasan’s character, remorse and the prospect for rehabilitation. I accept that Ager Hasan has the support of his family and friends. It is understandable that those close to him want to express the positive aspects of his character.

[23] Several of these letters spoke about Ager Hasan suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. At a voir dire during the trial, evidence was led about a diagnosis of PTSD made in 2009. This evidence was ruled inadmissible because of the absence of any contemporaneous diagnosis. I do not consider the comments in the letters of support about Ager Hasan suffering from PTSD to be a factor in determining the period of parole ineligibility.

Messages Sent from Ager Hasan’s Cell Phone

[24] Evidence was presented at sentencing about messages that originated from Ager Hasan’s cell phone. It is necessary to determine if those messages were sent by Ager Hasan.

[25] The parties agreed that Ager Hasan was arrested in Baird County, Texas on July 11, 2017. At the time of arrest Ager Hasan was a passenger in a vehicle registered to his mother. At the time of arrest Ager Hasan was living in an apartment in San Antonio, Texas which was a multi-party residence. The apartment was searched following the arrest which resulted in Ager Hasan’s laptop computer, a Samsung Galaxy cell phone and a ZTE Cricket cell phone being seized.

[26] It was also agreed that on July 4, 2017, Melinda Vasilije’s mother, Anna Todorovic received a Facebook message from a person by the name of “Lucas Mack”. That message is as follows:

Just an outsider looking in. Sorry about what happened to your daughter! However it seems like it could have been avoided had you not let her stay in the apartment after he broke on [sic] the first time. Partially your fault yes but I hope u put [sic] forgive yourself we all make mistakes this one however this one cost your daughters [sic] life. Next time don’t let your daughters date middle easterns haha oh well you have other daughters right :)

[27] Greg MacDonald was a member of the Waterloo Regional Police Service who assisted in the investigation of the present case. On July 3, 2017 he accessed a Facebook page entitled “Justice for Melinda”. He observed a post by Lucas Mack dated July 3, 2017 at 4:02 p.m.. That post reads:

This is what happens when a whore dates a douche. Murder. From the pictures I’m seeing online it seems melinda vasilije got around and her idiot boyfriend got around too. Both cheating on each other until they found out about each other which led to murder. People, do not let your daughters be cheap sluts like melinda, they either end up dead or drugged out. And don’t let your son’s [sic] be like him either. #hoes and #douchbags

[28] When Cst. MacDonald clicked on the name “Lucas Mack” on the Facebook posting he obtained a photograph of a male. He then did a reverse Google search on the photograph which he found to be associated with a professor at the University of Edinburgh by the name of Christopher Lucas.

[29] Oliver Ammendolia, a forensic analyst in the Cybercrime unit of the Waterloo Regional Police Service, testified that he analyzed the Galaxy cell phone seized from the apartment in San Antonio. It was admitted at trial that this cell phone belonged to and was regularly used by Ager Hasan.

[30] Det. Ammendolia found a Facebook account for Lucas Mack on the Galaxy cell phone. Associated with this account was a photograph of Christopher Lucas. He also located a photograph of Christopher Lucas which was created on June 16, 2017. He found the Facebook message to Anna Todorovic on the Galaxy cell phone and he concluded that the message had been sent from that cell phone.

[31] In cross examination, Det. Ammendolia testified that the text message to Anna Todorovic could have been sent by someone other than the owner of the cell phone. He also said that the Galaxy cell phone was password protected by a pattern.

[32] The Crown submits that I should conclude that Ager Hasan created the Lucas Mack identity on the Galaxy cell phone using the image of Christopher Lucas. It can be inferred that Ager Hasan sent the message to Anna Todorovic and posted the message to the Justice for Melinda Facebook page using the fictitious name Lucas Mack.

[33] On behalf of Ager Hasan it is submitted that the Crown is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he sent the Facebook messages because this is an aggravating factor. I should conclude that the Crown has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Ager Hasan is responsible for initiating the Facebook messages.

[34] The following facts have been established based on the evidence at trial and the sentencing hearing:

a) the Galaxy cell phone belonged to and was regularly used by Ager Hasan; b) the above Facebook message was sent to Anna Todorovic from Ager Hasan’s Galaxy cell phone on July 4, 2017; c) the above Facebook message was sent to Justice for Melinda on July 3, 2017 from Ager Hasan’s Galaxy cell phone; d) the Galaxy cell phone was seized from Ager Hasan’s apartment in San Antonio; e) the location from which the Galaxy cell phone was seized was a multi-party residence; f) the Galaxy cell phone was password protected by a pattern; g) the Galaxy cell phone had Facebook and Facebook messenger accounts in the name of Lucas Mack; h) the Facebook accounts for Lucas Mack were associated with the photograph of Christopher Lucas; i) the image of Christopher Lucas on the Galaxy cell phone was created on June 16, 2017; j) there were images of Christopher Lucas on the Galaxy cell phone; k) the creator and sender of the Facebook messages knew; i. that Melinda Vasilije had been murdered; ii. that Ager Hasan had broken into Melinda Vasilije’s apartment; iii. the name of Melinda Vasilije’s mother; iv. that both Ager Hasan and Melinda Vasilije had been unfaithful during their relationship; v. that cheating during the relationship led to the murder; l) there is no evidence that anyone other than Ager Hasan used the Galaxy cell phone or knew how to access it using the pattern password.

[35] The Supreme Court of Canada addressed the issue of circumstantial evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt in R. v. Villaroman, 2016 SCC 33, [2016] 1 S.C.R. 1000. The Court held that when dealing with circumstantial evidence, other reasonable possibilities inconsistent with guilt should be considered, but the Crown does not need to negative every possible conjecture, no matter how irrational or fanciful. Other reasonable possibilities must be based on logic and experience and not on speculation (para. 37). Alternative inferences must be reasonable, not just possible (para. 42).

[36] Interestingly, the issue in Villaroman was whether the Crown had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knew of the child pornography found on his computer and knew that it was child pornography. At paragraph 65 the Court stated:

There was no evidence that anyone else lived there or that anyone else had the opportunity to download pornography onto the computer. While the accused need not lead evidence to show that another person had such access to his laptop, based on the evidence and lack of evidence before the Court, it is speculative to consider whether another person had such an opportunity, let alone to assume that Mr. Villaroman would be ignorant of the presence of the material on his computer.

[37] The evidence in this case is that the Galaxy cell phone which belonged to and was regularly used by Ager Hasan was the device from which the Facebook messages originated. The cell phone was seized from the apartment where Ager Hasan was residing at the time of his arrest. The cell phone was password protected. The cell phone had accessed information about Christopher Lucas and Facebook accounts in the name of Lucas Mack, with which a photograph of Christopher Lucas was associated, were found on the phone. The sender of the messages knew detailed information about the circumstances leading up to the murder including that the murder was associated with infidelity on the parts of Ager Hasan and Melinda Vasilije.

[38] While it is possible that someone accessed Ager Hasan’s Galaxy cell phone, without his knowledge on multiple occasions, accessed and downloaded a photograph of Christopher Lucas, created Facebook accounts in the name of Lucas Mack and sent the Facebook messages to Anna Todorovic and Justice for Melinda containing intimate details about the circumstances of the murder, such a finding, in my view, would be speculation.

[39] I therefore am satisfied that the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Ager Hasan was the author and sender of the Facebook messages in question.

[40] The text message sent to Melinda Vasilije after she was dead and the Facebook messages to Anna Todorovic and Justice for Melinda are shockingly negative evidence about the character of Ager Hasan.

Programs Completed While in Custody

[41] While in custody, Ager Hasan has successfully completed courses in Anger Management, Managing Stress, Substance Abuse, Thoughts to Action, Understanding Feelings and Dealing with Conflict Situations. All of these programs were completed subsequent to the trial.

Statement by Ager Hasan

[42] Ager Hasan apologized to Melinda Vasilije’s family and friends. He attributed his conduct on the night of the murder to a lack of insight and understanding which he said he has now acquired. He said he will dedicate a portion of his life to combatting intimate partner homicide. He also emphasized the hardships he has experienced in his life and while in custody awaiting trial.

[43] This statement of remorse is to be commended but it is difficult not to consider that it is motivated to a significant extent by the desire to receive a lenient sentence.

Nature of the Offence and the Circumstances Surrounding the Commission of the Offence

[44] This was a brutal attack on a former intimate partner, in her home, while her roommate was absent. No attempt was made to offer assistance or call for help. Rather, Ager Hasan ran from the scene and fled the country. He began to create evidence for the foundation of a defence. He showed no compassion for Melinda Vasilije’s family.

Recommendation of the Jury

[45] As required by section 745.2 of the Criminal Code, the jury were given the opportunity to make recommendations with respect to the number of years in prison that Ager Hasan should serve before being eligible for release on parole.

[46] The following is the recommendation of the jury regarding the appropriate period of parole ineligibility:

10 years 1 juror 15 years 4 jurors 17 years 1 juror 20 years 1 juror 25 years 2 jurors No recommendation 3 jurors

[47] The recommendation of the jury is but one factor to be considered in determining the period of parole ineligibility. It has certain limitations which were identified in R. v. Barry [1991] O.J. No. 2666. It is not determinative.

[48] In the present case only one juror recommended a period of parole ineligibility of less than 15 years. Seven jurors recommended a period of parole ineligibility of 15 years or more and 3 jurors made no recommendation.

Principles of Sentence

[49] The principles of sentencing are set out at s. 718 of the Criminal Code and include denunciation of the unlawful conduct, deterrence of the offender and others and rehabilitation of the offender. Section 718.2 (a) of the Criminal Code provides that a sentence should reflect the aggravating and mitigating circumstances of the offence and the offender. Pursuant to s. 718.2 (a)(ii) and (iii) of the Criminal Code, the abuse of an intimate partner and abuse of a position of trust are deemed to be aggravating circumstances. S. 718.2 of the Criminal Code provides that a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences in similar circumstances.

Analysis

Range of Parole Ineligibility

[50] In R. v. McKnight, [1999] O.J. No. 1321, the Ontario Court of Appeal established a range of parole ineligibility for second degree murder of a wife or girlfriend of between 12 to 15 years (para. 77). Subsequently, in R. v. Czibulka, 2011 ONCA 82, the Court of Appeal approved of a range of parole ineligibility for a domestic homicide of 12 to 17 years (para. 67). A range of parole ineligibility of 12 to 17 years was approved by the Court of Appeal in R. v. French, 2017 ONCA 460 (para. 31).

[51] In R. v. Baig, 2022 ONCA 692, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a sentence for a domestic murder that included a 17-year parole ineligibility period. The Court of Appeal stated at paragraph 3: “We see no error in principle” in the sentencing judge’s reasons (1999 ONSC 2713). In those reasons the sentencing judge stated that the upper end of the range of sentence for parole ineligibility in domestic homicides was 17 years (para. 40). The sentencing judge also stated that while sentencing guidelines are helpful, they are not permanently fixed nor are they straightjackets on the exercise of judicial discretion (para. 42).

[52] I therefore conclude that the range of parole ineligibility to be imposed for domestic homicides is between 12 and 17 years and that range is not inflexible.

[53] The Crown submits that I should increase the upper end of the range of parole ineligibility for domestic homicides to 18 years. I decline to do so. In my view, any increase in the range should be left to the Court of Appeal. That does not mean that in an appropriate case, a period of parole ineligibility outside the range could not be imposed.

Conditions of Pre-sentence Custody

[54] There is a difference of opinion amongst judges of this court about whether conditions experienced by the offender in pre-sentence custody can be considered in determining the period of parole ineligibility for second degree murder.

[55] In R. v. Daley, [2021] O.J. No. 6677, Christie, J. held that in determining the appropriate period of parole ineligibility, the sentencing judge is limited to the factors set out in s. 745.4 of the Criminal Code, namely, the character of the offender, the nature of the offence, the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence and any recommendation of the jury about the period of parole ineligibility, absent an application for relief pursuant to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (paras. 77 and 81).

[56] In R. v. Dumpfrey, 2022 ONSC 2187, Sweeny, J. concluded that s. 745.4 did not allow him to consider pre-sentence custody in determining the period of parole ineligibility (para. 73).

[57] In R. v. Champagne, [2023] O.J. No. 807, Skarica, J. followed the Dumpfrey decision in holding that s. 745.4 did not permit conditions of pre-sentence custody to be considered in the determination of the appropriate period of parole ineligibility.

[58] In R. v. Morales, [2023] O.J. No. 1146 a different conclusion was reached. Woolcombe, J. held that, while the conditions of pre-sentence custody could not result in a “credit” to be applied to reduce what the sentencing judge found to be the appropriate period of parole ineligibility, such conditions could be considered as a mitigating factor in determining the period of period of parole ineligibility (paras. 56 and 65).

[59] While I was not referred to, and I have not found, any decisions which have specifically followed Morales, there are several Ontario decisions which have considered pre-sentence custody conditions when fixing the period of parole ineligibility.

[60] In R. v. Shire, [2023] O.J. No. 887, Boswell, J. came to the conclusion that conditions of pre-sentence custody can be taken into consideration as a mitigating factor which can impact on the period of parole ineligibility (para. 66).

[61] In R. v. Le, [2022] O.J. No. 3939, Forestell, J. considered harsh conditions of pre-sentence custody to reduce the period of parole ineligibility (paras 31 and 32).

[62] In R. v. Duncan, 2016 ONCA 754, the Court of Appeal established the principle that enhanced credit for harsh pre-trial custody conditions can provide mitigation apart from and beyond the 1.5 credit referred to in s. 719(3.1) of the Criminal Code (para. 6).

[63] In R. v. Marshall, 2021 ONCA 344, the Court of Appeal in a non-homicide case explained the difference between “Duncan” credit and “Summers” credit as follows at paragraphs 51 and 52:

It is also important to appreciate and maintain the clear distinction between the “Summers” credit and the “Duncan” credit. The "Summers" credit is a deduction from what the trial judge determines to be the appropriate sentence for the offence. The "Summers" credit is calculated to identify and deduct from the appropriate sentence the amount of the sentence the accused has effectively served by virtue of the pretrial incarceration. The "Summers" credit is statutorily capped at 1.5:1. It is wrong to think of the "Summers" credit as a mitigating factor. It would be equally wrong to deny or limit the "Summers" credit because of some aggravating factor, such as the seriousness of the offence [citation omitted].

The “Duncan” credit is not a deduction from the otherwise appropriate sentence, but is one of the factors to be taken into account in determining the appropriate sentence. Particularly punitive pretrial incarceration conditions can be a mitigating factor to be taken into account with the other mitigating and aggravating factors in arriving at the appropriate sentence from which the "Summers" credit will be deducted. Because the “Duncan” credit is one of the mitigating factors to be taken into account, it cannot justify the imposition of a sentence which is inappropriate, having regard to all of the relevant mitigating or aggravating factors.

[64] I am therefore of the opinion that there is conflicting authority in the Superior Court on the issue of whether pre-sentence custody can be considered when determining the period of parole ineligibility for a charge of second degree murder. With respect to those who hold a contrary view I conclude that conditions of pre-sentence custody can be considered as a mitigating factor in determining the appropriate period of parole ineligibility that should be served by an offender being sentenced for second degree murder.

[65] In my view s. 745(4) of the Criminal Code does not prohibit consideration of mitigating factors relevant to the circumstances of the offender when fixing the period of parole ineligibility. The conditions of pre-sentence custody, in appropriate circumstances, can be considered a mitigating factor (Duncan para. 6). “Duncan” credit does not result in a specific number of days, months or years being deducted from the period of parole ineligibility. Rather, the “Duncan” credit can be considered as a mitigating factor in determining the appropriate period of period of parole ineligibility.

[66] In summary, I choose to follow Morales rather than the decisions that have come to a contrary conclusion.

[67] Ager Hasan has been in custody since July 11, 2017. For most of that time he has been at Maplehurst Correctional Complex. According to the records of Maplehurst which were filed at the sentencing hearing, he has spent 629 days in total lockdown and 92 days in partial lockdown. The number of days of lockdown that were as a result of the COVID-19 epidemic is not specified in the records but I am prepared to credit some amount of lockdown time as being as a result of COVID-19.

[68] In my view it is important to consider the history of this case when dealing with the extent to which credit is given for this mitigating factor.

[69] On February 22, 2019, the trial of this matter was set for four weeks beginning September 30, 2019. Ager Hasan sought an adjournment of that trial which was unopposed. The reason for the adjournment is not set out in the Endorsement.

[70] The trial was next scheduled to proceed before me on April 26, 2022. The week before the trial was set to start, Ager Hasan made an application for a stay of proceedings or in the alternative an adjournment of the trial “for the purpose of consulting and retaining its own bloodstain pattern analyst”. The application was dismissed whereupon Ager Hasan discharged his lawyer and the trial was adjourned to January 9, 2023. The start of the trial was then postponed in order to accommodate the schedule of Ager Hasan’s present counsel.

[71] No evidence was presented by a defence blood stain pattern analyst.

[72] In my view, while Ager Hasan is entitled to have the conditions of pre-sentence custody treated as a mitigating factor in determining the period of parole ineligibility, the impact of that mitigation should not be significant. This trial could have proceeded in September, 2019 but an adjournment was sought and obtained by the defence. Had the trial proceeded as originally scheduled, it would have been completed before the onset of the pandemic. Similarly, the period of custody from April 2022 to April 2023 was entirely to accommodate Ager Hasan.

[73] For these reasons the mitigating factor arising out of the conditions of pre-sentence custody should be modest.

Caselaw

[74] Both sides presented cases in support of their respective positions. In my view those authorities tend to support the range of sentence for domestic homicides which is set out above.

[75] No two cases are identical and the appropriate sentence will be tailored to the facts of the case and the circumstances of the offender.

Aggravating Factors

[76] I find the following to be aggravating factors relating to the offence and the offender:

a) Ager Hasan and Melinda Vasilije were in a domestic relationship; b) Melinda Vasilije was killed in her own apartment while her roommate was absent; c) the murder was the result of a vicious attack which resulted in Melinda Vasilije being stabbed 47 times; d) Ager Hasan fled the scene of the killing without attempting to provide assistance or call emergency services; e) Ager Hasan fled to the United States; f) Ager Hasan immediately began attempting to create a record in the form of photographs and video recordings for the purpose of avoiding or minimizing his role in the killing; g) Ager Hasan texted Melinda Vasilije knowing she was dead so as to suggest someone else was responsible for her murder; h) Ager Hasan sent disgusting messages to Anna Todorovic and a Facebook page created in honour of Melinda Vasilije; i) Ager Hasan broke into Melinda Vasilije’s apartment and assaulted her roommate and her roommate’s brother approximately one month before the murder; j) Ager Hasan was subject to a recognizance on the night he murdered Melinda Vasilije to not enter the Region of Waterloo and not communicate with her, both of which terms he breached.

Mitigating Factors

[77] I find the following to be mitigating factors relating to the offence and the offender:

a) Ager Hasan has no criminal record; b) Ager Hasan has the support of his family and the community; c) Ager Hasan has experienced difficult pre-sentence custody conditions; d) Ager Hasan expressed remorse at the time of his sentencing.

The Appropriate Period of Parole Ineligibility

[78] Although there are mitigating factors to be considered, the aggravating factors are far more significant.

[79] Denunciation and deterrence are the most important sentencing principles in this domestic homicide. The assault on Melinda Vasilije was vicious and unprovoked. Immediately following the killing, Ager Hasan was concerned only about himself. Until very recently he has exhibited no remorse.

[80] In my view the appropriate period of parole ineligibility, taking into consideration the principles of sentence and the aggravating and mitigating factors, is 16 years for the murder of Melinda Vasilije.

Sentence

[81] Ager Hasan will be required to serve 16 years of his life sentence of imprisonment before being eligible for parole, with the period to commence on July 11, 2017.

[82] There will be an order pursuant to s. 487.051 of the Criminal Code for the taking of DNA samples based on a primary designated offence.

[83] There will be a weapons prohibition order pursuant to s. 109 of the Criminal Code for life.

[84] There will be an order pursuant to s. 743.21 of the Criminal Code prohibiting Ager Hasan from communicating directly or indirectly with Anna Todorovic and Christina Vasilije and any members of their immediate family, and Anna Manda and any member of her immediate family.

G.E. Taylor, J.

Released: September 27, 2023