R. v. Andrews Date:, 2012 BCPC 486

Citation: R. v. Andrews Date: 20121221 2012 BCPC 0486 File No: 223525-1-V Registry: Vancouver IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. CHELSEA MARIE RAIDER ANDREWS REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE J.F. PALMER Counsel for the Crown: M. Booker Counsel for the Defendant: G.S. Hutchison Place of Hearing: Vancouver , B.C. Date of Hearing: November 23, 2012 Date of Judgment: December 21, 2012

A Corrigendum was released by the Court on January 11, 2013. The corrections have been made to the text and the Corrigendum is appended to this document. Introduction [1] Chelsea Andrews was charged on Count 1 of Information 2223532-1-V with participating in the Vancouver riot, which occurred June 15, 2011, following the defeat of the Vancouver Canucks in game seven of the Stanley Cup Finals. Ms. Andrews was also charged in Count 2 of the Information with break and enter of the Blenz Coffee franchise located in the 400 block of West Georgia Street and committing an indictable offence therein.

The Crown accepted the guilty plea on Count 1 with the understanding that the circumstances of participating in the riot included all the circumstances of the other particularized charge. General Context [2] In each of the four cases before the Court for sentence today the Crown prepared ADMISSIONS OF FACT, which commenced with general background on the riot, continued with more specific background with respect to the area or areas of the riot where the offender participated and then very specific details of the offenders participation in the riot.

A copy of the ADMISSIONS OF FACT entered as an exhibit in each proceeding is attached to the relevant Reasons For Judgment. [3] It is common ground that there were approximately 155,000 people in the core of downtown Vancouver on June 15, 2011. Nearly a third of that crowd was concentrated around large screens in the vicinity of the Vancouver Public Library. Within a minute of the end of the game a vehicle parked in the area was overturned and subsequently set on fire.

The following paragraph, included in all the various ADMISSIONS OF FACT, summarizes what ensued: As the rioting crowds occupied West Georgia Street and the surrounding areas, multiple commercial premise windows were broken and the contents of the premises looted. Vehicles were vandalized, broken into and set on fire. Crowds of people faced off against the police and projectiles were thrown at the police. Numerous police officers and civilians were assaulted.

An atmosphere of lawlessness, violence and destruction quickly consumed the downtown core of Vancouver. [4] The ADMISSIONS OF FACT all concluded with the same 10 paragraphs detailing the impact of the riot.

The statistics cited provide some reference points to map the scope of the riot. • 1035 Emergency Personnel were deployed to the downtown core of Vancouver on the night of the riot • 928 police officers, two-thirds of whom were members of the Vancouver Police Department and the other one-third from other Lower Mainland municipalities and the R.C.M.P. • 63 members of the Vancouver Fire and Rescue Service • 44 members of the British Columbia Ambulance Service • The number of calls to 911 in the hours of the riot exceeded the number of calls ever received in any 24 hour period • 92 calls to 911 were on hold at one point during the riot • A riot event was defined as an incident related to a location, a piece of property or a person • 297 riot events were identified, many involving hundreds of perpetrators, and the breakdown was as follows: a. 26 arsons; b. 193 acts of mischief; c. 26 break and enters d. 52 assaults on civilians (18), police officers (32, one officer assaulted twice) and 1 firefighter • 116 arrests were made in the area, and during the time, of the riot • 112 businesses were damaged • 122 vehicles were damaged or destroyed, 24 of which were emergency service vehicles belonging to either the police or fire department • there is no comprehensive assessment of the monetary losses sustained as a result of the riot but as of February 2, 2012 the reported losses were calculated at $3,778,190.59

[5] The ineffable effects of the riot are acknowledged in the final paragraph of the IMPACT OF THE RIOT part of the ADMISSIONS OF FACT. The psychological impact of the Riot is difficult to quantify as personal experiences varied greatly. Some persons barricaded themselves inside businesses for safety, others guarded their businesses against rioters, a number of citizens defended property or other persons at risk to themselves. Some people have sought counseling. What is common to all is that the Riot has stripped a sense of safety and security from citizens of Vancouver.

The Law [6] The Crown has also created a CROWN BOOK OF AUTHORITIES – SENTENCING , which is varied only by inclusion of the latest decisions on Vancouver riot sentencings. [7] It is acknowledged by the defence that Crown counsel has fairly and completely assembled the relevant case law from this jurisdiction and elsewhere on sentencing in riot cases. The sentencing chart at Tab 1 catalogs decisions from 1991 to the present by case name, location of the riot, the offender’s age, presence or lack of criminal record, participation in the riot and sentence. [8]

Part XXIII of the Criminal Code , formerly titled Punishment, is now titled Sentencing. The first six subsections deal with Alternative Measures and both police and government records relating to offences and the persons by whom the offences have been committed.

Section 718 PURPOSE, states: The fundamental purpose of sentencing is to contribute, along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing just sanctions that have one or more of the following objectives: (

a) to denounce unlawful conduct; (

b) to deter the offender and other persons from committing offences; (

c) to separate offenders from society, where necessary; (

d) to assist in rehabilitating offenders; (

e) to provide reparations for harm done to victims or the community; and (

f) to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgment of the harm done to victims and to the community. [9] The principles a judge must apply in determining a fit sentence in any case are set out in the following subsections: FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE [10]

Section 718.1 A sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of culpability of the offender. OTHER FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES [11]

Section 718.2 A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles: (

a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender, and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, (

i) evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation or any other similar factor, (ii) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused the offender’s spouse or common-law partner, (ii.1) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused a person under the age of eighteen years, (iii) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused a position of trust or authority in relation to the victim, (iv) evidence that the offence was committed for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a criminal organization, or

(

v) evidence that the offence was a terrorism offence shall be deemed to be aggravating circumstances; (

b) a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances; (

c) where consecutive sentences are imposed, the combined sentence should not be unduly harsh or long; (

d) an offender should not be deprived of liberty, if less restrictive sanctions may be appropriate in the circumstances; and (

e) all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders, withparticular attention to the circumstances of aboriginal offenders. [12] Crown counsel has consistently taken the position in these sentencing proceedings that the only appropriate sentence for riotingis a custodial sentence.

Apart from cases involving an offender experiencing some mental health concerns the Crown has opposedconditional sentences as inconsistent with the fundamental purpose and principles of sentence. [13] It is generally undisputed that the lead authority on sentencing for participation in a riot is R. v. Loewen (1992) (BC CA), 75 C.C.C. (3d) 184, a decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The case arose out of the Penticton riot andinvolved an eighteen year old offender who pled guilty to two counts of mischief and participating in a riot. He had no prior criminalrecord.

He was sentenced to 10 months on the riot charge consecutive to the concurrent one month sentences on the mischief counts. Onappeal the Court reduced the sentence to six months on the participation in a riot charge and one month concurrent on the mischiefcharges. A one year probation order followed the six months custody for rioting. [14] Mr. Justice Hinds, writing for the majority in Loewen, held in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 that, To take

part in a riot is by mere presence to contribute to the excitement, fervor, intimidation and dangerousness of the unlawfulassembly. Penticton had the precedent of the riot which closed the Kelowna Regatta and rioting is becoming prevalent throughout theinner cities of North America. This is not the time for unwarranted leniency nor by the same token for unwarranted severity. Care must be taken at the same time topreserve the message of general deterrence. A riot is, by its very nature, a serious threat to orderly society.

If riots become prevalent, they will undermine many of the values of a freeand democratic society. [15] These reasons are cited by Crown counsel as authority for their position that rioting is so serious an offence that the principle ofgeneral deterrence overrides any consideration of the principle that “all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonablein the circumstances should be considered for all offenders”. [16] There is now a collection of cogent, compelling judgments on the 2011 Vancouver riot to be considered.

The case bookincludes fifteen decisions, both reported and unreported, by eleven different Judges of the Provincial Court on cases arising out of the2011 Vancouver riot. The primacy to be accorded the principle of general deterrence has been acknowledged repeatedly in thesedecisions. [17] The sentences imposed range from 16 months custody to a suspended sentence with two years of probation. Custodial termshave been imposed by way of conditional sentence orders and by intermittent sentence orders.

Lengthy periods of probation withsignificant numbers of Community Work Service hours have been imposed in addition to many of the custodial terms to address the needfor reparation. [18] Crown appeals of two of these decisions, R. v. Peepre, (a September 13, 2012 decision of Walker, J.) and R. v.

KennedyWilliams, (a September 21, 2012 decision of Galati, J.) have been filed and the hearing is scheduled for the third week of January 2013. [19] Arguments have been raised on behalf of some offenders that the Court should consider the discharge provisions of theCriminal Code and impose a conditional discharge with a lengthy period of probation. It has been suggested that it would be in the bestinterests of a very youthful offender with no prior criminal record and not contrary to the public interest.

These applications have beenopposed by Crown counsel on the basis that a discharge, like a conditional sentence order, would be contrary to the public interest andincompatible with the principles of general deterrence and denunciation. Most recently, in relation to one of these applications, JudgeBastin, in R.v. Epp, Tab 35 of the Crown’s Book of Authorities, held at paragraph 63, that the Crown’s position was correct. Chelsea Andrews’ Participation in the Riot

[20] Ms. Andrew’s participation in the riot is set out in paragraphs 29 through 39 of the ADMISSIONS OF FACT , Exhibit 3 in this proceeding. To summarize Ms. Andrews and a friend ran together, hand-in-hand, into the Blenz store on West Georgia Street, after numerous rioters had smashed out the windows and doors. Ms. Andrews took two large bottles of coffee syrup and left the store. She was captured on video drinking from one of the bottles, sharing the syrup with others and posing for pictures with the looted items. Shortly thereafter Ms.

Andrews throws the bottles overhand at the only remaining windows, which are located at the very top of the premises. Ms. Andrews entered the Blenz premises a second time through a broken window. She remained in the downtown core for another three hours, moving between various riot events and occasionally posing for a picture. Aggravating Factors [21] Ms. Andrews’ participation in the destruction of the Blenz store was aggravated by the fact that she used merchandise stolen from the store to try and create further damage to the few remaining windows that were too high to impede anyone from entering the premises.

It is also aggravating that while Ms. Andrews was participating in the riot, the owner-operator of the store, three of her employees and a customer were barricaded in an office inside the premises. These people were terrified and unable to get any reassurance or assistance from the over-burdened police department. It is also aggravating that Ms. Andrews remained in the area for such a long period of time promoting the spirit of lawlessness with her celebratory demeanour. Mitigating Factors [22] Mitigation lies in Ms.

Andrews reporting to the police after the riot even though she was not entirely accurate in her account of her behaviour. Mitigation also lies in her guilty plea. Ms. Andrews is a youthful offender with no prior criminal history. She is deeply ashamed of her behaviour and remorseful for the terror experienced by the people barricaded in the office at Blenz. [23] The Court has had the benefit of both a Pre-Sentence Report which sets out Ms. Andrews’ background and family circumstances and an assessment by the Surrey-Fraser Valley Regional Forensic Services Clinic. Ms.

Andrews, of Cree descent matrilineally, has been actively involved in the Aboriginal community throughout her lifetime, dancing with the Metis Association and participating as an athlete in the National Aboriginal Indigenous games. She has moved to Vernon recently and is enrolled at the Open Door Learning Institute upgrading her math and sciences in furtherance of her plans to become a nurse. [24] Ms. Andrews’ participation in the riot had a deleterious impact on her relationships with her parents. She was especially close with her father growing up.

He was deeply shocked and disappointed by her participation in the riot and began to treat her in a very negative way. She has experienced low-grade depression since her mid-teens and was hospitalized twice in 2011 after attempting suicide. Ms. Andrews is agreeable to participating in counseling. Conclusion [25] Counsel are agreed that the form of sentence, in all the circumstances of this case, ought to be a conditional sentence order. The Crown seeks a term of 4 to 6 months followed by probation. Mr.

Hutchison submitted that a 3 month term followed by probation would adequately address the principles of denunciation and deterrence, citing the recent decisions of Judge Senniw in R. v. Burkett , Tab 29 of the casebook, and Judge St. Pierre in R. v. Pateman and R. v. Long , Tabs 32 and 33 respectively. [26] Taking into consideration all the circumstances of Ms.

Andrews’ participation in the riot, the aggravating and mitigating factors, the purpose and principles of sentence and the submissions of counsel I find the appropriate sentence to be one of three months custody to be served by way of conditional sentence order. [27] The terms of the Conditional Sentence Order are as follows: 1. You will keep the peace and be of good behaviour. 2.

You will report to the Conditional Sentence Supervisor at 275 East Cordova Street, City of Vancouver, Province of British Columbia before 4:00 p.m. on Monday December 24, 2012, in person, and thereafter as and when directed by your Conditional Sentence Supervisor. 3. Any changes in your name, address or employment must be reported immediately to your Conditional Sentence Supervisor. 4. You must return to Court if so directed by the Court. 5. You may not leave the Province of British Columbia without the written permission of either the Court or your Conditional Sentence Supervisor.

6. You will abstain absolutely from the possession and consumption of alcohol and any drugs or substances which are not prescribed for you, except you may have possession of alcohol in the context of your lawful employment. 7. You will not be outside your place of residence between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. the following morning, seven days per week, except for the purposes of going to, returning from and engaging in lawful employment or otherwise as permitted by your Conditional Sentence Supervisor. 8.

You will present yourself at the door of your residence or answer your telephone to confirm to any peace officer your compliance with the curfew condition. 9. You will participate in counseling at the direction of your Conditional Sentence Supervisor. 10. You are not to attend at any Blenz Café in the Province of British Columbia. 11. You are not to possess any weapons as they are defined in

Section 2 of the Criminal Code . [28] There will be a one year term of probation to follow the conditional sentence. The terms of the probation order are as follows: 1. You will keep the peace and be of good behaviour. 2. You will, immediately upon the expiration of your Conditional Sentence, begin reporting, as and when directed by your Conditional Sentence Supervisor to the Probation Office to commence your probation term. 3. You will participate in counseling as directed by your Probation Officer. 4.

You will, at the direction of and to the satisfaction of your Probation Officer, perform 100 hours of Community Work Service in the first 10 months of your probation term. 5. You will not attend at any Blenz Café in the Province of British Columbia. 6. You will not possess any weapons as they are defined in

Section 2 of the Criminal Code . [29] The Victim Fine Surcharge applies and you will have until the end of February 2013 to pay that surcharge. Payment can be made at any Court Registry. The Honourable Judge J.F. Palmer Provincial Court of British Columbia Court File No. 223525-1-V

Vancouver Registry IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AGAINST CHELSEA MARIE RAIDER ANDREWS ADMISSIONS OF FACT Pursuant to

Section 655 of the Criminal Code , the following facts are hereby admitted for the purpose of dispensing with proof thereof at the sentencing hearing herein: THE RIOT GENERALLY 1 . On June 15, 2011, the Vancouver Canucks hockey team played game seven of the Stanley Cup Finals against the Boston Bruins (the “Game”) in the City of Vancouver, Province of British Columbia (“Vancouver”). A riot occurred in the downtown core of Vancouver between approximately 7:30 p.m. on June 15, 2011 and 12:30 a.m. on June 16, 2011 (the “Riot”).

A copy of a Map of the downtown core of Vancouver depicting the area where Riot related incidents occurred is attached under Tab 2 of the Crown Book of Documents which is marked as Exhibit 1 in these proceedings. 2 . Chelsea Marie Raider Andrews (“Andrews”) participated in the Riot. 3 . On June 15, 2011, there were approximately 155,000 people in the downtown core of Vancouver during the Game at various venues including Roger’s Arena, public viewing locations, private residences, restaurants and bars. 4 .

The main public viewing site was situated around the Vancouver Public Library bounded by West Georgia Street to the North, Robson Street to the South, Hamilton Street to the East and Homer Street to the West (the “Live Site”). A map showing the location of the Live Site and nearby businesses is attached under Tab 3 of the Crown Book of Documents which is marked as Exhibit 1 in these proceedings. 5 . Approximately 55,000 people watched the game at the Live Site. 6 . Television coverage of the Game commenced at 5:00 p.m. The Boston Bruins won the Game at approximately 7:42 p.m. with a final score of 4-0. 7 .

At approximately 7:43 p.m. a passenger vehicle was overturned at the Live Site. That vehicle was set on fire shortly before 8:00 p.m. The Riot started at this location and spread throughout the downtown core of Vancouver. 8 . A second vehicle was overturned at the Live Site and was set on fire at approximately 8:30 p.m.

9 . As the rioting crowds occupied West Georgia Street and the surrounding areas, multiple commercial premise windows were broken and the contents of the premises looted. Vehicles were vandalized, broken into and set on fire. Crowds of people faced off against the police and projectiles were thrown at the police. Numerous police officers and civilians were assaulted. An atmosphere of lawlessness, violence and destruction quickly consumed the downtown core of Vancouver, including the 400 block of West Georgia Street. RIOTING AT BLENZ CAFE 10 .

At the corner of West Georgia Street and Richards Street, there is a commercial building owned and managed by Austeville Properties Ltd.. Austeville Properties Ltd. leases retail space to the following businesses: a. Black & Lee Formal Wear, located at 688 Richards Street (“Black & Lee”) b. The Blenz Cafe located at 495 West Georgia Street (“Blenz”); and c. Da Gino Restaurant located at 100-475 West Georgia Street (“Da Gino”). 11 . These businesses are located one block west of the Live Site.

A map showing the location of these businesses is attached under Tab 3 of the Crown Book of Documents which is marked as Exhibit 1 in these proceedings. 12 . On the night of June 15, 2011, Blenz was open with four employees working, including the franchise owner, Min Dun (“Dun”). Da Gino was also open for business and had several patrons in the restaurant. Black & Lee was closed and there were no employe es inside the store at the time of the Riot. A security guard was working on site. 13 . Blenz is approximately 1000 square feet, the entrance/ exit faces West Georgia Street. 14 .

On June 15, 2011, Blenz was scheduled to close at 8:00 p.m. However, by 5:00 p.m., franchise owner, Dun, noticed that the area around the store was getting very crowded and that many people were becoming intoxicated. At 6:00 p.m., Dun decided to close the store. Staff closed and locked the doors. Some customers remained inside. 15 . Between 8:00 p.m. and 8:30 p.m., approximately 300 to 400 people crowded at the intersection of West Georgia Street and Richards Street. The rioters began smashing the windows at Da Gino and the common entrance for 475 West Georgia. 16 .

Shortly after 8:30 p.m., the rioters began smashing the windows at Blenz and Black & Lee. The first act of destruction involved a young man ramming a shopping cart into the store window causing the glass to shatter. Dun witnessed this incident and began to clean up the damage to the store. A few minutes later, the rioters began throwing newspaper boxes and other objects at the windows, causing the windows to shatter. The rioters entered and destroyed the inside of the store. 17 .

Dun, her staff, and a lone customer initially hid behind the customer service counter as they did not feel it was safe to leave the store. Dun heard people in the crowd say that a car was on fire and she could see thousands of people outside cheering. 18 . Out of fear and to avoid injury, Dun, and the others, moved into a small office in the back of the store and barricaded themselves inside. They propped up a ladder and other objects in front of the door to prevent the rioters from entering the office. 19 . At 8:37 p.m., Dun made her first call to 911 seeking help from the police.

She reported that the people were smashing the windows of Blenz and destroying her store. 20 . At 8:40 p.m., a citizen called 911 to report a large group of people breaking glass and entering Blenz. The citizen advised there were hundreds of people around with a group with about twenty or so who were intent on breaking glass and attempting to enter the store.

21 . At 8:44 p.m. and 9:00 p.m., Dun made two additional 911 calls. 22 . Dun, the staff and the customer remained barricaded in the small office until police were able to secure the area near the intersection of West Georgia Street and Richards Street. When Dun was able to exit the small office, she saw that her store had been completely destroyed. 23 . While the destruction and looting was occurring at Blenz, groups of people were also breaking the front windows of Black & Lee and looting the store. Black & Lee is located immediately north of Blenz.

The Bank of Montreal directly South of Blenz was also being destroyed and looted around this same time. 24 . On August 26, 2011, Dun provided an audio and video-taped statement to police where she described what she observed and the actions she took during the Riot. In this statement, Dun also described the emotional, physical and financial impacts of the riot. Portions of her transcribed statement wherein she describes the impact that the rioters’ actions had upon her are attached at Tab 6 of the Crown Book of Documents. 25 . The damage to Blenz was substantial.

All of the front windows were destroyed, merchandise and equipment was stolen from the store. In total, the overall amount of loss to Blenz was over $100,000. The damage was so extensive it required a prolonged closure for refurbishment. The store remained closed for 64 days (until August 19, 2011) when it re-opened for business. 26 . Photographs of the damage to Blenz are attached at Tab 9 of the Crown Book of Documents. 27 . Brian Noble, Director and co-founder of Blenz, provided a victim impact statement, dated July 26, 2011. It is attached at Tab 7 of the Crown Book of Documents. 28 .

The Victim Impact Statement of Larry Kinash, Vice-President of Development of Blenz Coffee, is attached at Tab 8 of the Crown Book of Documents. CHELSEA ANDREWS’ PARTICIPATION IN THE RIOT 29 . On June 15, 2011, Andrews (age 18) took the skytrain from Surrey to downtown to watch the Canucks hockey game. She was wearing a black leather jacket over a light blue shirt and medium blue jeans. A photo of Andrews is attached at Tab 1 of the Crown Book of Documents, marked as Exhibit 1 in these proceedings. 30 . Andrews watched the hockey game downtown at the main Live Site located by the Vancouver Public Library.

She met up with a group of friends. 31 . Andrews had consumed alcohol but was not intoxicated. 32 . Following the game, Andrews left the Live Site and travelled westbound on Gerogia Street. As Andrews walked past the Bank of Montreal (on the right) and the Budget Rent-a-Car (on the left), members of the crowd were destroying and damaging the windows of these businesses. 33 . At approximately 8:50 p.m. Andrews moved towards Blenz. She is captured on video running, hand-in-hand with a friend, towards the store.

Once inside Blenz, Andrews grabbed two large flavoured coffee syrup bottles (the “Bottles”) from the customer service counter and exited the store. After stealing the Bottles, Andrews re-joins her friends on West Georgia Street. There she can be seen drinking from the Bottles. Andrews celebrates her looting by posing and taking photographs with the Bottles.

34 . Approximately two minutes later, Andrews throws the Bottles overhand towards the upper windows of the Blenz. After throwing the Bottles, Andrews is again seen on video cheering with a friend. 35 . Andrews breaks into Blenz a second time. She enters through a broken window. 36 . Andrews’ participation in the looting at Blenz and the surrounding context are depicted in the video evidence contained on the DVD marked as Exhibit 2 in these proceedings, and in the photographs at Tab 9 of the Crown Book of Documents. 37 .

After looting the Blenz, Andrews, along with her friends headed north to the 600 block of Richards Street. Andrews poses for a picture in front of a burning vehicle. A photograph depicting Andrews is attached at Tab 11 of the Crown Book of Documents. 38 . At approximately 9:24 p.m., Andrews was again captured on video this time outside the front doors of a 7-Eleven store located at 596 Seymour Street, approximately four blocks from the Live Site. This 7-Eleven store had closed early due to the increasing thefts and property damage occurring during the Riot.

Andrews’ presence in front of the 7-Eleven store is depicted in the video evidence included on the DVD marked as Exhibit 2 in these proceedings. 39 . Andrews remained in the downtown core until approximately 12:30 a.m., when she took the skytrain home with friends. ANDREWS’ ATTENDANCE AT THE VANCOUVER POLICE DEPARTMENT 40 . On June 25, 2011, Andrews attended at the police detachment and gave a verbal statement to Cst. Scorrar regarding her involvement in the riot. She stated she was downtown with a friend and saw that the Blenz store on West Georgia Street, close to the Live Site, had all the windows broken.

She and a friend ran inside to take pictures and left with several bottles of flavoured coffee syrup. They took photographs with the stolen property, then returned the bottles back to the store and left. 41 . Cst. Scorrar arranged for Andrews to return to the police detachment on June 27, 2011 for a full interview with police. Andrews did not attend the scheduled interview. 42 . On September 21, 2011, photograph #77 was uploaded to the IRIT website. The individual in photograph #77 was subsequently identified as Andrews. 43 . On September 22, 2011, Andrews was arrested at her home.

Following her arrest, she provided a voluntary, warned statement to police. In her statement, Andrews identified herself in the photographs but exercised her right to silence with respect to her participation in the riot. IMPACT OF THE RIOT 44 . Set out below is a

summary of the overall context and impact of the Riot on the City of Vancouver, its citizens and businesses. 45 . On the night of the Riot, 1035 Emergency Personnel were deployed to the downtown core of Vancouver divided as follows: a. 928 police officers of which 606 were members of the Vancouver Police Department and 322 were members from other lower mainland municipalities and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (“Police”); b. 63 members of the Vancouver Fire and Rescue Services (“Fire Services”) and;

c. 44 members of the British Columbia Ambulance Service (“Ambulance Services”). 46 . On June 15, 2011 there were more calls to 911 in the 4 hour period after the Game then there had historically been in any 24 hour period. For example, at one point during the Riot there were 92 calls to 911 for Ambulance Services placed on hold. 47 . On June 15, 2011 at approximately 8:17 p.m. Ambulance Services Command determined that the area East of Burrard Street was not safe and relocated all, except six of their members, to St. Paul’s Hospital.

Six specially trained Ambulance Services members of the Integrated Tactical Support Unit (“ITSU”) remained with the Police in the area of the Riot. ITSU members responded to calls within the area of the Riot and coordinated casualty removal to safe areas for treatment. The six ITSU members were the only medical resource available in the area of the Riot. ITSU dealt with over 100 patients during the Riot. 48 . Between 6 p.m. on June 15, 2011 and 6 a.m. on June 16, 2011 St. Paul’s Hospital dealt with 150 emergency room visits.

In comparison, Vancouver General Hospital dealt with 15 emergency room visits for the same time frame. St. Paul’s Hospital also set up a patient decontamination area outside of the emergency room to deal with patients suffering from exposure to tear gas or pepper spray. An additional 100 people were treated at the decontamination area. 49 . The Integrated Riot Investigation Team of the Vancouver Police Department has identified 297 Riot Events.

A Riot Event is an incident relating to either a certain location, such as London Drugs, a piece of property, such as a motor vehicle, or a person, such as a victim of an assault. For example, the Break and Enter to London Drugs located at 710 Granville Street which involved looting of the store by approximately 300 individuals was recorded as a single event. The 297 events involved: a. 26 arsons; b. 193 mischiefs; c. 26 break and enters; and d. 52 assaults, of which 18 were civilians, 32 were police officers (one of whom was assaulted twice) and 1 was a firefighter. 50 .

There were 116 arrests in the area of the Riot on June 15, 2011. 51 . During the Riot: a. 112 businesses were damaged; b. 122 vehicles were damaged or destroyed, divided into three main categories of: i. 93 civilian vehicles; ii. 5 business vehicles; iii. 24 emergency vehicles (police and fire department); 52 . As of February 2, 2012, the total estimated monetary loss as a result of the Riot was $3,778,190.59. This can be attributed as follows: a. $2,715,591.59 to businesses; b. $537,869.00 to civilians; c. $524,730 to the City of Vancouver, Ambulance Services and St. Paul’s Hospital.

This figure is not a comprehensive representation of loss as 85 events have not provided estimates of loss and many additional costs such as lost wages, or labour costs for businesses have not been included.

53 . The psychological impact of the Riot is difficult to quantify as personal experiences varied greatly. Some persons barricaded themselves inside businesses for safety, others guarded their businesses against rioters, a number of citizens defended property or other persons at risk to themselves. Some people have sought counselling. What is common to all is that the Riot has stripped a sense of safety and security from citizens of Vancouver. DATED this 23 rd day of November 2012, at the City of Vancouver, Province of British Columbia.

Stephen Hutchison Michelle Booker Counsel for Chelsea ANDREWS Counsel for the Crown CORRRIGENDUM – Released January 11, 2013 In the Reasons for Judgment dated December 21, 2012, the following change has been made: [1] On page 10, Condition 6 of the Conditional Sentence Order, should read: 6. You will abstain absolutely from the possession and consumption of alcohol and any drugs or substances which are not prescribed for you, except you may have possession of alcohol in the context of your lawful employment.