R. v. S.G., 2023 BCPC 278

Citation: R. v. S.G. 2023 BCPC 278 Date: 20231219 File No: 21143-2C Registry: Surrey IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Youth Criminal Justice REX v. S.G. YOUTH MATTER RESTRICTION ON ACCESS s. 118 & s. 110 YCJA ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE S. SIDHU Counsel for the Crown: A. Bailey Counsel for the Defendant: I. Gill Place of Hearing: Surrey , B.C.

Dates of Hearing: July 12, Sept. 20, Oct. 17, 2023 Date of Judgment: December 19, 2023 [ 1 ] These are my reasons for sentence. Introduction [ 2 ] On November 18, 2022, the young person, [omitted for publication] 13-year-old S.G., took a loaded handgun concealed in his backpack to his high school. He passed the gun to a friend and posted photos on social media. Later that day, S.G. discharged the gun in a wooded area.

Once school officials became aware of S.G.'s possession of the gun, he was detained and the handgun was seized without incident. [ 3 ] S.G. pled guilty to possessing the loaded restricted firearm without being a holder of an authorization or licence, contrary to s. 95(1) of the Criminal Code . A Pre-Sentence Report was prepared. S.G. appears before me for sentencing.

Positions of Counsel [ 4 ] The Crown seeks a six-month deferred custody and supervision order, a custodial sentence served in the community, followed by a six-month probation order. [ 5 ] The Crown submits that a custodial sentence is available under s. 39(1)(

d) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act , as the circumstances of the offence fall within the exceptional case category. It argues that S.G.'s possession of a concealed loaded handgun at a populace high school and subsequent discharge of the firearm constitute aggravating circumstances, which make a non-custodial sentence inconsistent with the purpose and principles set out in s. 38 of the YCJA . [ 6 ] S.G. seeks an absolute discharge or, alternatively, a conditional discharge. He submits that he has been compliant on release conditions for almost a year and that any further conditions are unnecessary.

He also argues that a youth criminal conviction would have an adverse consequence on his ability to find future employment, travel, and enjoy certain activities and hobbies. [ 7 ] While S.G. acknowledges the seriousness of the offence, he submits that the circumstances before the court do not constitute an exceptional case, such that s. 39(1)(

d) is applicable. He points out that given his youthful age, his guilty plea, expression of remorse, and positive antecedents, a custodial sentence is not required to address the purpose and principles of sentencing in s. 38. Facts [ 8 ] The facts were set out in the Admissions of Fact and can be summarized as follows. [ 9 ] S.G. was a student at [omitted for publication] in Surrey. On November 18, 2022, S.G. went to school in possession of a Smith & Wesson semi-automatic handgun in his backpack. [ 10 ] In the morning hours, S.G. contacted his friend K.S. and told him to come to the washroom.

In the washroom, S.G. took out the handgun and passed it over to K.S. K.S. held the gun and took a picture of it and returned it to S.G. S.G. took a video of himself holding the gun and posted it on social media. [ 11 ] After lunch, S.G. texted K.S. and told him that he had shot the gun. [ 12 ] At approximately 2:00 p.m., school officials received information that S.G. was in possession of a gun. S.G., along with his backpack, were removed from the classroom and questioned by the principal and vice principal. [ 13 ] The principal located the handgun tucked in the inside pocket of the backpack.

When questioned as to why S.G. would bring the gun to school, S.G. replied that he had thought it would be cool to show people. [ 14 ] K.S. provided a video to the vice-principal, which showed a person wearing the same clothing as S.G. with an item resembling a firearm in a wooded area. The video showed the gun being raised, followed by a pop sound. [ 15 ] The handgun was registered to S.G.'s father and seized by the police. It was loaded with a 10-round magazine, holding nine bullets. The gun was a functional and operational restricted firearm, as per s. 84(1).

The ammunition located was also suitable for the handgun. [ 16 ] Although the admissions of fact do not expressly state that S.G. discharged the firearm, I am satisfied that he did so. Based on the facts that are before the court, it is the only reasonable inference to be drawn. [ 17 ] At the time of the offence, S.G. had a Minor Possession's Licence for Firearms. The licence allowed youths between the ages of 12 and 17 years, to borrow nonrestricted firearms, and to use them in accordance with the supervisory conditions attached to the licence.

Circumstances of the Young Person [ 18 ] S.G. is currently 14 years of age and attending Grade 9 at [omitted for publication] School. At the time of the offence, he was 13 years old, a couple of months shy of his 14th birthday. [ 19 ] He grew up in a stable home and resides with his parents, younger sister, and paternal grandparents. The family home is devoid of conflict, violence, and substance abuse. There are no issues of substance abuse or mental health in relation to S.G.

[ 20 ] S.G. and his family are deeply devoted to the Sikh faith. He is baptized and regularly attends for religious and cultural events. He wears a kirpan, a small dagger on his person, which is a symbol of his faith. [ 21 ] S.G. is close to his father. They are both members of the [omitted for publication] and [omitted for publication], and spent considerable time on the gun range. S.G. has been involved with shooting from a young age and is well-versed in the handling of firearms. He is skilled in skeet shooting and has won various competitions.

His hope was to make the [omitted for publication], although that is unlikely, given that he will be subject to a mandatory firearms prohibition as a component of his sentence. [ 22 ] S.G.'s father lawfully owns and possesses 25 firearms, which include the handgun which S.G. took to school. The guns were all seized by the police with the cooperation of S.G.'s family. [ 23 ] S.G. advises that his family was disappointed and upset about his conduct but remain supportive.

He was not subject to any further consequences from his parents as a result of the offence. [ 24 ] At the time of the offence, S.G. was a Grade 8 student at [omitted for publication] School. Prior to commencing high school, other than a one-day suspension in Grade 7 for filming a fight, there were no disciplinary or academic concerns noted by teachers. However, during S.G.'s Grade 8 year at [omitted for publication], he was failing his classes and exercised minimal effort.

He was expelled from [omitted for publication] after the incident and not permitted to return due to the impact and the seriousness of the event. [ 25 ] After a careful review by the School District, S.G. was allowed to enrol at [omitted for publication] on the condition that he would engage in counselling and agree to accept to random searches of his locker and backpack.

Since his attendance at [omitted for publication], he has applied himself in his classes and attained significantly improved academic achievement. [ 26 ] S.G. does not have any previous criminal history and has been fully compliant while on bail. He has taken full responsibility for the offence. In the PSR, he advised that he had taken the gun and ammunition from his father's safe secretly without his consent. The next day, he took the gun to school.

S.G. stated that he did so to impress others and to post his possession of the gun on social media. [ 27 ] Although there does not appear to be any malicious or nefarious reason in S.G. bringing the gun to school, I am unable to agree with the proposition that the offence and the decision to take the gun to school was impulsive. S.G.'s comments in the Pre-Sentence Report undermined any suggestion of impulsivity in his conduct. Rather, his comments demonstrate that he planned to take the handgun to school and had a purpose in doing so.

His actions were deliberate and intended to achieve that purpose. [ 28 ] As a result of the charges, S.G. has been unable to participate in skeet shooting or fully partake in Gatka, a Sikh martial arts discipline. In addition, S.G. acknowledged the impact of his actions on other students as well as his family. He advised that he found the court process stressful and that he has learned his lesson. Victim Impact Statement [ 29 ] A formal victim impact statement was not filed by the representatives for the high school. However, school officials were contacted by the report writer.

The school principal stated that his first priority was to ensure the safety of the 1800 staff and students at the school. He indicated that safety protocols were followed and that there were no long-term effects. A letter and email were sent to parents and students advising them of the incident. The vice-principal noted that for a few weeks, the incident was of significant discussion amongst the students, as it had been posted on social media. He also received a number of inquiries from parents and students expressing concern about school safety. He described the event as startling.

Aggravating and Mitigating Factors [ 30 ] Section 38(3) requires a court to consider the aggravating and mitigating factors in determining a sentence for a young person. [ 31 ] With respect to the aggravating factors, I take into account the following: 1. The commission of the involved an element of preplanning and deliberation. S.G. planned to take a loaded gun to school the night prior to the incident. He took steps to remove the gun and the ammunition from the locked safe, surreptitiously and without consent. 2. S.G. concealed the gun in a backpack and took it to school.

The backpack was in S.G.'s possession as he attended classes throughout the day, and thus the firearm was readily accessible to him. 3. Not only did S.G. take the loaded handgun to a public and populace location, a high school which had over 1800 students and staff, he also removed the gun from his backpack and allowed at least one other student to handle the loaded firearm. The act of taking out the gun to show friends and allowing other students access to the firearm was dangerous and the risk of harm was extreme.

The gun could have accidentally discharged while being passed, or S.G. could have lost control of the possession of the gun to another person. 4. Later that day, S.G. discharged the firearm in a wooded area and the event was posted on social media. While S.G. shot the gun into the air, the risk for potential harm is always present whenever a firearm is discharged where members of the community may be. 5. S.G.'s action caused concern and fear for some students, staff, and parents.

Given the recent and far too prevalent incidents of firearms and shootings in school settings, the presence of a loaded firearm at school invokes strong feelings of fear and panic. As noted by school officials, there were emails from students and parents expressing concerns about the startling incident. 6. S.G., while a youthful offender, was knowledgeable about firearm handling and safety protocols. He had a Minor Possession's Licence in which he would have learned about the proper and safe handling of firearms.

Despite that knowledge, he failed to exercise the safety requirements and acted in a manner contrary to his licence. [ 32 ] There are also several mitigating factors which I take into account. These include the following:

1. S.G. has entered a guilty plea, acknowledging his responsibility for the offence. The guilty plea was entered early, and not only savedvaluable court time and judicial resources, it has spared witnesses, especially young witnesses, from having to attend court and testify.S.G. has also expressed remorse for the harm caused by his actions. 2. S.G. has no prior criminal history and is a first-time offender. 3. Since S.G.'s attendance at [omitted for publication], his commitment to and motivation in school has greatly increased. At the time ofthe incident, he was struggling in school and obtaining low grades.

He has since improved his marks and appears to be a significantlybetter student. He is motivated to maintain his academic achievement in the school year. 4. S.G. has otherwise led a prosocial life. He is involved in religious and cultural events and is actively engaged in skeet shooting andGatka. Since the offence, he has participated extensively in horse riding and attends at basketball drop-ins at the community centre. 5. While S.G. exercised extremely poor decision-making and judgment, there is no evidence that he had any malicious intent ornefarious purpose in taking the gun to school.

The consensus is that S.G. took the gun to impress others and to post on social media. 6. S.G. has been fully compliant with his release conditions and has not incurred any breaches. Since his arrest, because of his bailorder, S.G. has not been able to participate in activities that he greatly enjoyed such as skeet shooting and Gatka. The Law [33] Sentencing of a young person is governed by the sentencing regime set out in the YCJA. Other than a few exceptions, theCriminal Code sentencing provisions do not apply to young persons. [34]

Section 3 of the Act outlines the principles that govern the overall

interpretation of the YCJA.

Section 38 sets out the sentencingprinciples and the objectives that a youth sentence should address. These principles and objectives include imposing sentences whichlikely assist in the rehabilitation and reintegration of the young person, promote a sense of responsibility, and result in anacknowledgement of harm done to victims and the community. [35] Section 38(2) expressly states that a youth court judge must determine a youth sentence in accordance with the principles set outin s. 3 of the Act.

Section 38(2) also requires a court to consider other sentencing principles such as proportionality, parity, and theavailability of all other lesser restrictive sanctions capable of achieving the objectives set out in s. 38(1). [36]

Section 39 addresses the imposition of custodial sentences for young persons. Due to concerns about the broad discretion givento sentencing courts and the over use of custody under the Young Offenders Act, Parliament set out a more structured approach in theYCJA as to when a custodial sentence may be imposed. [37] Section 39(1) restricts the imposition of a custodial sentence, unless at least one of the conditions set out in the

section issatisfied. In the facts of this case, counsel agree that the only possible avenue for a custodial sentence to imposed is under s. 39(1)(d). [38] Section 39(1)(

d) states: 39

(1) A youth justice court shall not commit a young person to custody under

section 42… unless (

d) in exceptional cases where the young person has committed an indictable offence, the aggravating circumstances of the offence aresuch that the imposition of a non-custodial sentence would be inconsistent with the purpose and principles set out in

section 38. [39] The application of s. 39(1)(

d) is a two-stage process. At the first stage, a determination must be made as to whether thecircumstances of the offence are aggravating. At the second stage, a determination is to be made as to whether, in those circumstances,the imposition of a non-custodial sentence would be inconsistent with the purpose and principles of s. 38. [40] I have been provided with authorities by the Crown, which include several cases where the possession of a firearm by a youngperson constituted an exceptional case. Cases provided by the Crown include: R. v. R.E.W., (ON CA), [2006] OJ No.265; R. v. T.C., 2012 ONCJ 849; R. v.

T.D.M,, 2015 SKPC 147; and R. v. D.T., 2018 ONCJ 998. S.G. relies on the case of R. v.Angelov, 2013 ONCJ 117. [41] I have also reviewed R. v. H.M., 2019 ONCJ 790 and R. v. S.T., 2009 BCCA 274. [42] R.E.W. was one of the earlier cases which looked at the application and

interpretation of s. 39(1)(d). In that case, the youngperson was convicted of being an accessory after the fact to a very gruesome murder. In sentencing the young person to a jail sentence,the youth court judge held that the nature of the crime and the substantial involvement of the young person in its commission satisfiedthe condition set out in s. 39(1)(d). A custodial sentence was imposed. The young person appealed the sentence and argued that theyouth court had erred in its application of s. 39(1)(d). [43] The Ontario Court of Appeal took the opportunity to clarify the scope of s. 39(1)(d). The court held that this

section was to begiven a narrow

interpretation so as not to undermine Parliament's intention to move away from the broad and discretionary regime in theYoung Offenders Act to a more structured approach under the YCJA. At paragraphs 39 and 40, the court stated: [39] There are two primary reasons why para. (

d) of s. 39(1) should similarly be given a narrow

interpretation. First, paras. (a)û(

c) of s.39(1) already encompass the overwhelming majority of cases where custody would be expected as a reasonable outcome. Paragraph (a)applies where the young person has committed a "violent offence" now interpreted in R. v. C.D.; R. v. C.D.K, supra, as "an offence inthe commission of which a young person causes, attempts to cause or threatens to cause bodily harm"… Paragraphs (

b) and (

c) focus onthe young person's prior history. Paragraph (

b) applies to the young person who has failed to comply with non-custodial sentences.Paragraph (

c) applies to the offender with a serious criminal history, indicating "a pattern of findings of guilt". Section 39(1)(

d) acts as

something of a residual category and should not be interpreted so as to render the limits implicit in the other parts of subsection (1)ineffectual… [40] Second, s. 39(1)(

d) is focused solely on the circumstances of the offence and not the character or history of the offender. See R. v.J.E.C., 2004 BCSC 1341 , [2004] B.C.J. No. 2244… at para. 63. The circumstances of the offence must be so aggravating thatnothing less than custody will vindicate the purpose and principles set out in s. 38. The YCJA is generally focused on the best interests ofthe young person and s. 38, in particular, encompasses the least restrictive measure and last resort principles.

Section 38 also requires thecourt to take into account the principles set out in s. 3 which have rehabilitation as a prime focus. [44] The court further held that s. 39(1)(d), the exceptional case gateway, could only be used in the rarest of cases, where thecircumstances of the offence were so extreme that anything less than custody would not reflect societal values. The court found that anexample of an exceptional case was where the community was shocked by the circumstances of the offence (at para. 43). [45] The Ontario Court of Appeal agreed with the youth court sentencing judge that custody under s. 39(1)(

d) was available andupheld the sentence. [46] R.E.W. was considered by our Court of Appeal in R. v. S.T. In S.T., the young person was convicted of theft over $5,000 andarson after he drove a stolen pickup truck while intoxicated. Taking into consideration the young person's inability to comply with anundertaking and the nature of the offence, which the youth court judge characterized as a horrendous property crime, the young personwas sentenced to a custodial sentence. S.T. appealed his sentence and argued that the preconditions in s. 39(1)(

b) or (d), allowing for acustodial sentence, had not been satisfied. [47] The appeal court held that while s. 39(2), which required a judge to consider all other alternatives to custody, did not expresslyreferred to s. 39(1)(d); a judge sentencing a young person under s. 39(1)(

d) was still required to consider all available sanctions otherthan custody reasonable in the circumstances by application of s. 38(2). [48] In S.T., the Crown relied on R.E.W. It submitted that the focus of s. 39(1)(

d) was on the nature of the offence, not the youngperson's circumstances or antecedents. At paragraph 46, the court held: [46] While I agree with the basic premise of those remarks, I would frame the analysis differently. As I read s. 39(1)(d), in“exceptional cases” the aggravating circumstances of the offence render a non-custodial sentence inconsistent with the purpose andprinciples of s. 38 because factors such as proportionality, responsibility and rehabilitation demand a custodial sentence. Thatdetermination will necessarily involve an assessment of the young person’s circumstances and background. However, in the finalanalysis under s.39(1)(

d) the aggravating circumstances ultimately outweigh those “other relevant considerations” and, in that sense,render them irrelevant in the resulting imposition of a custodial sentence. [49] In conclusion, while the Court of Appeal agreed that the requirements in s. 39(1)(

b) had not been met, it concluded that custodywas justified under s. 39(1)(d), as the case was exceptional and the circumstances of the offence were aggravated. [50] There are a number of cases in which s. 39(1)(

d) was held to apply to situations where young persons were found in possession offirearms. [51] In R. v. T.C., the 13-year-old young person made a video of himself handling an unloaded handgun while in his residence. Theyoung person also made a second video featuring him and his 17-year-old cousin, where they were smiling while posing with andpointing the handgun.

The young persons racked and discharged the unloaded firearm and uttered threatening street jargon. [52] The court acknowledged that while the possession of the handgun did not automatically result in a custodial sentence, thatgenerally, circumstances in which a young person possessed a firearm, even unloaded, were aggravated and that the imposition of a non-custodial sentence would be inconsistent with the purpose and principles of sentencing under s. 38. The court sentenced the young personto a six-month deferred custody and supervision order. [53] In R. v.

T.D.M., in sentencing the young person, the court found that the possession of a loaded firearm constituted an exceptionalcase with aggravated circumstances as per s. 39(1)(d). The 16-year-old young person was stopped by the police in downtown Saskatoonin the early morning hours. He was in possession of a backpack, which, upon search, contained a sawed-off 22-calibre rifle. The firearmwas unloaded, but three rounds of ammunition were located in the clothing of the young person and the backpack.

The young person toldthe police that he was homeless and that he had agreed to transport the gun for an adult in exchange for money. [54] At the time of sentencing, the young person was living with his father at the Big River First Nation. It was accepted that many ofthe circumstances which led to the young person's offending arose due to his lack of supports and supervision in Saskatoon.

While theyoung person still had some difficulties, the Pre-Sentence Report was positive and indicated that he had made strides and was engaged inprosocial activities. [55] The court held that the circumstances were aggravated and so shocking as to threaten the widely shared community values. Thecourt held that the gateway to custody under s. 39(1)(

d) was open and imposed a custodial sentence. [56] The case of R. v. D.T. reached a similar conclusion. In D.T., the police conducted a search warrant at the young person'sresidence he shared with his mother. The police located a loaded 12-guage sawed-off shotgun and a large amount of ammunition,including 33 rounds of 12-guage shotgun shells. There was no explanation as to how the young person obtained possession of the firearmand for what purpose he possessed it. [57] The young person was 17 years of age at the time of the offence and did not have a criminal record.

He grew up in an unstableenvironment where he witnessed and was victim to violence in the home. He also struggled academically and behaviourally at school.Despite those difficulties, the young person had considerable potential. He had graduated from high school, was gainfully employed, andhad future goals.

[ 58 ] The court held that the case was an exceptional case within s. 39(1)(

d) and that a non-custodial disposition was inconsistent with the purpose and principles of sentencing. Taking into account the aggravating and mitigating factors, the court imposed a six-month deferred custody and supervision order, followed by probation. [ 59 ] In R. v. H.M. , the 16-year-old young person was found in possession of a loaded handgun tucked into the waistband of his pants. [ 60 ] H.M. had a challenging childhood and suffered from cognitive defects and possibly ADHD.

However, he was motivated to complete high school and had engaged in counselling. [ 61 ] The Crown sought a nine- to 12-month sentence of imprisonment. The young person submitted that an absolute or conditional discharge was appropriate due to Charter breach findings by the court. [ 62 ] The court held that s. 39(1)(

d) applied, as the case was exceptional and the circumstances aggravated. The court noted that the offence was serious, and although the gun was not in a public place, the young person was in a vehicle with three other individuals in a parking garage of a downtown Toronto apartment. The court found that there was no reason for the young person to possess the loaded firearm other than to cause harm or threaten others. The circumstances of the possession of loaded handgun was shocking and threatened widely shared community values.

The court held that neither an absolute discharge, conditional discharge, nor a lesser sanction was appropriate and consistent with the purpose and principles of sentencing. The court imposed a six-month deferred custody and supervision order, followed by probation. [ 63 ] Finally, in R. v. J.M ., the young person was found in possession of loaded handgun while he was in a vehicle. The handgun had the serial number scratched off and the young person had sandpaper in his possession. He told the police that he had received the gun from a friend a few days earlier for protection.

He reported that he had been the target of an attempted shooting. [ 64 ] The young person was 17 years of age, complied on bail, and had no criminal record. Although he struggled academically and behaviourally in school, he had the support of his family and prospects for rehabilitation. [ 65 ] The court held that the possession of the gun was planned and deliberate and had serious potential for harm. The court found that the case was exceptional and that the circumstances were aggravating.

He was sentenced to eight months of open custody and four months of community supervision. [ 66 ] S.G. has provided the case of Angelov . In Angelov , the 20-year-old accused pled guilty to assault with a weapon and dangerous driving. The offences occurred while he was driving his vehicle on the highway in downtown Toronto. The accused was followed by a larger truck. When the truck pulled along side his vehicle, the accused waved or pointed an imitation firearm.

Upon seeing the accused brandish the firearm, the driver of the truck swerved from one lane into another, resulting in a near-collision with other vehicles on the roadway. The accused submitted that the driver of the truck had been tailgating his vehicle for some time and pulled up along side his vehicle in an intimidating manner. [ 67 ] The Crown sought a jail sentence of four to six months. The accused sought an absolute discharge. [ 68 ] The accused was a full-time university student and had obtained his international pilot's licence. He had no criminal record, and had otherwise led a prosocial life.

Since the offence, he had completed counselling and performed volunteer hours at the foodbank. He was assessed as a low risk for criminal reoffending. [ 69 ] The court found that the accused had panicked and displayed a momentary lapse of judgment. It accepted the accused's claim that a criminal conviction, even a conditional discharge, would have an adverse consequence on his future employment opportunities. The court granted the accused an absolute discharge. Analysis [ 70 ] While sentencing cases can assist and provide guidance to the court, sentencing is an individualized process.

Thus, I must look at the circumstances of this offence and this particular young person in the context of the purpose and principles of sentencing set out in ss. 3 and 38 of the YCJA . [ 71 ] There are several aggravating factors before the court, which I have already reviewed. These factors include that S.G., with planning and deliberation, took a loaded handgun concealed in his backpack to his high school. The gun was handled by S.G. at school and passed to at least one other individual.

Later that afternoon, S.G. discharged the firearm in a wooded area. [ 72 ] I have also found there to be mitigating factors, including S.G.'s early guilty plea, expression of remorse, and lack of criminal history. He has a supportive family, is involved in community sports and activities, and has otherwise led a prosocial life.

His purpose in taking the loaded firearm to school was to impress others and not to intentionally cause harm or engage in other criminal behaviour. [ 73 ] I must consider the least restrictive sanction which is capable of achieving the purpose and principles of sentencing. [ 74 ] I do not agree that an absolute discharge or even a conditional discharge is appropriate. The case provided by S.G. does not assist. The facts are easily distinguishable. In Angelov , the accused, a young adult, was in possession of an imitation firearm in his vehicle and did not discharge the weapon.

He pled guilty to assault with a weapon. S.G. was in possession of a loaded firearm, which he took to his high school and then discharged in a wooded area. S.G. pled guilty to possession of a loaded restricted firearm. [ 75 ] In Angelov , the judge found that the accused's conduct was impulsive and due to a momentary lapse of judgment. I found that S.G.'s conduct was not only planned and deliberate but also purposeful.

The facts at bar are far more alarming and egregious. [ 76 ] Furthermore, as the accused in Angelov was an adult, the court was satisfied that a criminal conviction would have a serious and real impact on his future prospects for employment. In the case at bar, as S.G. is a young person, his criminal record will be subject to

the strict regime under the YCJA that deals with disclosure, access, and destruction of youth records. [ 77 ] I find that the gravity of the offence is very high and the moral culpability of S.G. to be significant. I am mindful of the young person's positive antecedents, but the circumstances are so aggravated. I find that this is an exceptional case, as per s. 39(1)(d). [ 78 ] I further conclude that nothing other than a custodial sentence will achieve the purpose and principles of sentencing.

The community would find it shocking that a young person would take his father's handgun and ammunition from a locked safe without consent; conceal the loaded handgun in a backpack; take the gun to his high school, which has over 1800 students and staff; show other students the handgun and pass the loaded firearm to another; shoot a bullet from the handgun; and then, conceal the gun again in his backpack, which he took to his classes. [ 79 ] The circumstances are disturbing, and to say that the risk of harm to others by the young person's conduct was significant is an understatement.

Having a loaded firearm in a public place, like a school, is a very dangerous endeavour. It strikes fear in the heart of students, parents and the community members, particularly in a climate where firearms in schools are no longer isolated events.

The circumstances of his offence are so aggravated that any lesser sanction than a custodial sentence would fail to reflect societal values. [ 80 ] I agree with the Crown that a six-month deferred custody and supervision order, followed by a six-month probation order is the least restrictive sanction I can impose that achieves the purpose and principles of sentencing under the YCJA . [ 81 ] S.G., please stand. I am going to sentence you to a six-month deferred custody and supervision order, pursuant to s. 42(2)(

p) of the Act. [ 82 ] There are the statutory conditions that you are going to be subject to under s. 105(2).

Those conditions are as follows, so please listen carefully, and if you do not understand a condition, please ask. [ 83 ] Firstly, you must keep the peace and be of good behaviour. [ 84 ] You must appear before the youth justice court when required to do so. [ 85 ] You must report to the provincial director immediately on release, and then be under the supervision of the provincial director or person designated by the youth justice court. [ 86 ] You must inform the provincial director immediately on being arrested or questioned by the police. [ 87 ] You must report to the police or any named individual as instructed by the provincial director. [ 88 ] You must advise the provincial director of the young person's address of residence on release and after release report immediately to the clerk of the youth justice court or the provincial director of any change in that address, in the young person's normal occupation, including employment, vocational or educational training and volunteer work, and the young person's family or financial situation, and that may reasonably be expected to affect the young person's ability to comply with the conditions of the order. [ 89 ] You must also not own, possess, or have control of any weapon, ammunition, prohibited ammunition, prohibited device, or explosive substance except as authorized by the order. [ 90 ] And the last statutory condition is that you must comply with any reasonable instruction that the provincial director considers necessary in respect of any condition of the conditional supervision in order to prevent a breach of that condition or to protect society. [ 91 ] There are other conditions as well.

Those are the mandatory ones. I am obligated to tell you about those. [ 92 ] Firstly, you must report in person to a youth worker at Unit 1, 15355 - 102A Avenue in Surrey, British Columbia by three o'clock tomorrow, that is Wednesday, December 20th, 2023.

And after that you report as directed by your youth worker. [ 93 ] When you first report to your youth worker, you must provide them with the address or the location where you live and regularly sleep and your phone number if you have one, and you must not change them without notifying your youth worker before making that change. [ 94 ] You must not go to or be within 50 metres of [omitted for publication] School located at [omitted for publication], British Columbia. There is an exception.

That exception is if you are in a moving vehicle on your way to some other place. [ 95 ] You must attend, participate in and complete any intake, assessment, counselling or education program as directed by your youth worker. This may include such assessment, counselling, or programming offered by the Youth Forensic Psychiatric Services, but does not include psychiatric treatment. [ 96 ] You must not possess, directly or indirectly, any weapon as defined by the Criminal Code . That includes any firearms and ammunition.

It includes crossbows, prohibited or restricted weapons or devices, or explosive substances; anything used, designed to be used or intended for use in causing death or injury to any person, or to threaten or intimidate any person; any imitation firearms or weapons, including any compressed air guns, BB guns or pellet guns; and any related authorizations, licences and registration certificates, and you must not apply for any of these. There are two exceptions to this. The first exception is that you may carry and possess a kirpan.

The second one is that you may be in possession of weapon while you are engaged in the practice of gatka, under the supervision of an adult. [ 97 ] The next condition is that you must participate in a restorative justice program to address the impact of your crime on the victim at the discretion of your youth worker. [ 98 ] You must attend and participate in the Intensive Support and Supervision Program as directed by your youth worker, as well.

[ 99 ] S.G., do you understand those conditions? There is a lot of them, so if you have any questions, please ask. You understand? Okay. [ 100 ] I have to advise you that if you fail to abide by any of these conditions, you will find yourself back before the court and there will be a review of this order. Okay? And there may be custody that will be involved. [ 101 ] I am also going to put you on probation for six months after the completion of that order.

There are statutory conditions to that probation order. [ 102 ] The first one is that you must keep the peace and be of good behaviour. [ 103 ] You must appear before the court when required to do so by the court. [ 104 ] You must notify the court or your youth worker in advance of any change of name or address and promptly notify the court or your youth worker of any change of employment or occupation. [ 105 ] You must report in person to a youth worker at Unit #1, 15355 - 102A Avenue in Surrey, British Columbia, within two business days after the completion of your deferred custody and supervision order, unless you have obtained before the completion of your deferred custody and supervision order written permission from your youth worker to report elsewhere or within a different timeframe.

After that, you must report as directed by your youth worker. [ 106 ] When you first report to your youth worker, you must provide them with the address of the location where you live and regularly sleep and your phone number if you have one. You must not change them without notifying your youth worker before making that change. [ 107 ] You must not go to or be within 50 metres of [omitted for publication] School located at [omitted for publication], British Columbia. There is an exception.

That exception is if you are in a moving vehicle on your way to some other place. [ 108 ] You must attend, participate in and complete any intake, assessment, counselling or education program as directed by your youth worker. This may include assessment, counselling or programming offered by the Youth Forensic Psychiatric Services, but does not include any psychiatric treatment. [ 109 ] You must not possess, directly or indirectly, any weapon as defined by the Criminal Code .

That includes firearms and ammunition, crossbows, prohibited or restricted weapons or devices, or explosive substances; anything used, designed to be used or intended for use in causing death or injury to any person, or to threaten or intimidate any person; any imitation firearms or weapons, including any compressed air guns, BB guns or pellet guns; any other related authorizations, licences and registration certificates, and you must not apply for any of these. Again, there are two exceptions. First is that you may carry and possess a kirpan.

The second one is that you may possess a weapon while you are engaged in the practice of gatka, under the supervision of an adult. [ 110 ] You must participate in a restorative justice program to address the impact of your crime on the victim, at the discretion of your youth worker. [ 111 ] You must attend and participate in the Intensive Support and Supervision Program as directed by your youth worker. [ 112 ] You must complete 20 hours of community work under the direction of your youth worker. Your community work service must be completed by October 1st, 2024.

If you complete community service hours under the supervision of your youth worker before the start of this probation order, those hours can count towards your 20-hour total. [ 113 ] S.G., do you understand all the conditions in your probation order? They are very similar to the conditions on your deferred custody supervision order. [ 114 ] THE ACCUSED: Yes, Your Honour. [ 115 ] THE COURT: Okay. I have to advise you that you fail to abide by any of those conditions in the probation order, you can find yourself back before the court, charged with a further offence.

Do you understand that as well? [ 116 ] THE ACCUSED: Yes, Your Honour. [ 117 ] THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I will dispense with the need for signature on that order. [PROCEEDINGS] [ 118 ] THE COURT: I have to make a few more orders. [ 119 ] Firstly, is s. 51. I am obligated that when a person is found guilty of an offence referred to (sic) any paragraphs of s. 109(1) (

a) to (

d) of the Criminal Code , that a youth court judge shall -- and I do make an order prohibiting the young person from possessing any firearm, crossbow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition, or explosive substance during the period specified in the order as determined in accords (sic) with subsection (2). And that is for a period of two years. I will make two exceptions to that again. The first is that you may carry and possess a kirpan.

Secondly is that you may possess a weapon while you are engaged in the practice of gatka under the supervision of an adult. [ 120 ] There is also a forfeiture order that has been provided, and this is pursuant to s. 42(2)(

j) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act and s. 491 of the Criminal Code ; that is that upon being satisfied that S.G. has committed an offence that involves or the subject matter of which is a Smith & Wesson handgun, model SD 9VE, 9 millimetre, bearing a serial number FZA8485 and ammunition, therein referred to as the fire and ammunition -- and the fire and ammunition have been seized and detained, this court does make the order that the fire

and ammunition are forfeited to His Majesty in the Right of the Province of British Columbia and shall be disposed of as the Attorney General as defined in the Criminal Code directs, and I am going to sign that order as well. (ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)