R. v. Renderos Date:, 2012 BCPC 467

Citation: R. v. Renderos Date: 20121221 2012 BCPC 0467 File No: 223545-2-VC Registry: Vancouver IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. WILLMAR EUGENIO OVANDO RENDEROS REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE J. .F PALMER Counsel for the Crown: L. Sarbit Counsel for the Defendant: P. Morrow Place of Hearing: Vancouver , B.C. Date of Hearing: October 3, 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] Willmar Ovando Renderos was charged in Count 1 of Information 223545-2-VC with participating in the Vancouver riot which occurred June 15, 2011, after the defeat of the Vancouver Canucks in game seven of the 2011 Stanley Cup Finals. Mr.

Ovando Renderos was also charged: in Count 2 with the break and enter of Sterling Shoes and committing an indictable offence therein; in Count 3 with having his face masked while he intended to commit an indictable offence; and in Count 4 with committing mischief by wilfully damaging an Audi motor vehicle. Crown counsel accepted a guilty plea to Count 1 with the understanding that the circumstances of participating in a riot incorporated all the circumstances of the other particularized offences.

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 generally taken the position in these sentencing proceedings that the only appropriate sentence for rioting isa 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. Mr. Ovando Renderos’ Participation in the Riot

[20] Mr. Ovando Renderos participated at several locations in the downtown core of Vancouver, including the 600 block ofSeymour Street, the 600 block of West Georgia Street at the Hudson’s Bay Department store and the 600 block of Granville Street at theSterling Shoes store, all of which are in close proximity to the Live Site. (paragraph 11 of the ADMISSIONS OF FACT, Exhibit 3 inthis proceeding) [21] The full extent of Mr. Ovando Renderos’ participation in the riot is set out in paragraphs 12 through 21, paragraphs 36, 37, 42and 68 of Exhibit 3 which is appended to these reasons. [22] To summarize Mr.

Ovando Renderos watched the game at a restaurant /bar near Burrard Skytrain Station and walked towardsthe area of the riot after the game ended. After watching various incidents where other rioters were damaging vehicles, setting fires,breaking windows and fighting Mr. Ovando Renderos covered his face partially with his bandana and moved into the Granville Streetarea near the Hudson’s Bay. He participated in the riot by throwing objects at a Bay window in the 600 block of West Georgia Street,while other rioters were breaking windows, entering the Bay and looting. [23] Mr.

Ovando Renderos moved into the 600 block of Seymour Street and kicked the tail light of an Audi three times while otherrioters were attempting to set it on fire. He subsequently moved back to the 600 block of Granville Street and struck the glass door ofSterling Shoes repeatedly. He entered the store through a broken window, and left with three purses he had selected from the back of thestore. Aggravating Factors [24] Mr. Ovando Renderos chose to place himself in the area of the riot after the game ended.

He walked through numerous areaswhere rioting was occurring, observed the police deploy tear gas in an effort to quell the rioters and chose to then mask his face with hisbandana and began to participate in the riot. Mr. Ovando Renderos remained in the area and committed three separate criminal offencesat three different locations over a period of approximately two hours keeping his face partially masked with his bandana throughout thattime. [25] When Mr. Ovando Renderos was rioting at the Bay Loss Prevention Officers were trying to prevent damage and looting.

As many as 80 employees and some customers were forced to take refuge on the 7th floor of the building. The vandalism to cars onSeymour Street and the fires set triggered the Bay’s fire alarm and activated the sprinkler system. This caused significant fear among those taking refuge on the 7th floor that the store was on fire. The Bay sustained extensive damage resulting in a total financial loss$1,346,090.20. [26] Months later, on November 1, 2011 Mr. Ovando Renderos’ photograph was added to the website of the Integrated RiotInvestigation Team and the Riot Roundup Poster. Twenty days later Mr.

Ovando Renderos attended the Vancouver Police Departmentand was placed under arrest. He made a statement which was inaccurate with respect to his total involvement in the riot. Mitigating Factors [27] Mr. Ovando Renderos is 24 years of age, has a stable and supportive family and does not have any prior criminal record. He isemployed full-time and his income goes to the support of the family in that he holds a quarter share in the family home. He is the onlyson in a sibship of six. He takes care of his 10 year old sister daily between 4 and 7p.m. He has pled guilty and expressed remorse for hisactions.

Crown Position on Sentence [28] Crown counsel seeks a sentence in the range of four months custody for Mr. Ovando Renderos. The Crown is opposed to aconditional sentence order in all the circumstances of Mr. Ovando Renderos’ participation in the riot. Crown counsel argued that asentence served intermittently would have a greater impact in terms of denunciation and deterrence than a conditional sentence. Counselreferred to the decision of Judge Bagnall in R. v.

Patillo, 2012 BCPC 299 , 2012 BCPC 0299, as an example of a rioter involvedover a prolonged period of time, committing various criminal offences, who is not appropriate for a Conditional Sentence Order. Inparagraph 46 of her reasons Judge Bagnall articulates the appropriate sentence. In light of Mr. Patillo’s prolonged and various involvement in the riot, in my view, a sentence of incarceration is necessary here. Theimposition of a Conditional Sentence Order would not adequately address the primary principles of sentencing upon which the Courtmust focus: deterrence and denunciation.

The restraint that I have concluded is equally necessary will be reflected in the length of thesentence and the means by which it is served. It is my intention by this sentence to decrease the potential debilitating effects ofincarceration, and also to extend the penal consequences in terms of time. Defence Position on Sentence [29] Ms. Morrow argued that a Conditional Sentence Order would meet the principles of sentencing in light of Mr. Ovando

Renderos’ personal circumstances and the circumstances of the offence to which he pled guilty. Counsel urged the Court to find that Mr. Ovando Renderos was not an instigator as argued by Crown counsel but that he was at the lower end of the range of offences and offenders. Counsel also submitted that there was no evidence that Mr. Ovando Renderos intended to riot prior to arriving at the scene. [30] Counsel further submitted that if the Court determined that his client had to spend time in custody the sentence should be no more than 90 days so that he could serve it on an intermittent basis.

Conclusion [31] I am persuaded by the elegance and clarity of Judge Bagnall’s reasons and the comparable situations of Mr. Patillo and Mr. Ovando Renderos that the appropriate sentence in this case is one of 45 days to be served intermittently, on consecutive weekends, Friday night to Sunday. [32] The first day of this sentence will be today. You will be taken into custody and released on Sunday. You will report as directed on consecutive weekends each Friday at 8:00 p.m., as and where directed, and you will be held until the following Sunday.

This will continue until the sentence has expired. [33] When not in custody you must be bound by a Probation Order. The statutory terms will apply. You will meet with a Justice of the Peace who will explain the terms of the probation order to you and the consequences should you breach the order. [34] In light of the custodial sentence the surcharge is waived. ______________________________ The Honourable Judge J.F.

Palmer Provincial Court of British Columbia Court File No. 223545-2-VC Vancouver Registry IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AGAINST WILLMAR OVANDO RENDEROS 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 .

Willmar Ovando Renderos (“Ovando Renderos”) 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. 5 . Approximately 55,000 people watched the game at the Live Site. 6 . Television coverage of the Game commenced at 5 p.m. The Boston Bruins won the Game at approximately 7:45 p.m. with a final score of 4-0. 7 . At approximately 7:42 p.m. a passenger vehicle, a Nissan Versa, was overturned at the Live Site. That vehicle was damaged and ultimately set on fire and destroyed shortly before 8:00 p.m. The Riot started at this location and spread throughout the downtown core of Vancouver. 8 .

Video images showing the crowd in the Live Site and the vehicle being overturned and damaged are depicted on the DVD marked Exhibit 2 in these proceedings (“the DVD”). 9 . After the vehicle was set on fire, police officers forced the crowd away and firefighters attended and put out the fire. Once the fire was out, the crowd converged on a second vehicle at the Live Site, a GMC. Rioters damaged, overturned, and set the GMC on fire, at approximately 8:30 p.m. 10 .

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. 11 .

Ovando Renderos participated in the Riot at several locations in the downtown core of Vancouver, including the 600 block of Seymour Street, the 600 block of West Georgia Street at the Hudson’s Bay Department Store, and the 600 block of Granville Street at the Sterling Shoes Store, all of which are in close proximity to the Live Site. OVANDO RENDEROS’ PARTICIPATION IN THE RIOT 12 . On June 15, 2011, Ovando Renderos (age 24) was wearing a blue Canucks baseball cap, Canucks Raffi Torres (#13) hockey jersey, jeans and white Nike runners.

A photograph of Ovando Renderos is attached at Tab 1 in the Crown Book of Documents. 13 . Ovando Renderos watched the game downtown at a restaurant/bar near Burrard Skytrain Station. After the game ended, he walked towards the area of the riot.

14 . He made his way over to Granville Street at Nelson Street, where he watched another male attempting to light a paper plate on fire. A photograph depicting this action is included in the DVD. 15 . Around this time, between approximately 8:31 p.m. and 8:55 p.m., two unmarked police vehicles were damaged and flipped over in the 700 block of Nelson Street at Granville Street. In an effort to regain control over the block, police deployed tear gas. A photograph depicting the police presence in the area, and one of the flipped vehicles in front of Megabite pizza, is included in the DVD. 16 .

Ovando Renderos remained in the area and made his way Northbound on Granville Street. He observed people burning cars, breaking windows, and fighting. 17 . He placed his bandana partially over his face, covering his mouth and nose. He kept the bandana partially covering his face while he participated in the riot. 18 . Between approximately 9:15 p.m. and 9:45 p.m., in front of a large cheering crowd, Ovando Renderos threw objects at a glass window of The Bay, in the 600 block of West Georgia Street.

At the same time, other Bay windows on West Georgia Street and Seymour Street were being damaged and rioters were entering and looting the store. Loss prevention officers were inside the store trying to guard against the destruction and looting. 19 . Ovando Renderos then moved around the corner to the 600 block of Seymour Street where three parked vehicles were being destroyed and set on fire. Ovando Renderos kicked the tail light of one of the vehicles (the Audi) three times.

This occurred just after another male had begun to light the vehicle on fire and a good Samaritan attempted to remove the incendiary object. 20 . By approximately 10:00 p.m., Ovando Renderos had made his way into the 600 block of Granville Street, where he struck the glass door of Sterling Shoes with an object approximately five times. He broke and entered into Sterling Shoes, entering through a broken glass window and exiting with three purses. 21 . He stayed in the area of Sterling Shoes for approximately 20 minutes before leaving the area by skytrain. RIOTING AT THE HUDSON’S BAY COMPANY 22 .

The Hudson’s Bay Company Department Store (“The Bay”) is located in the downtown core and spans one street block. The Bay is located in the block that is bounded by West Georgia Street to the south, Seymour Street to the east, Dunsmuir Street to the north, and Granville Street to the west. 23 . The Bay is located three blocks west of the Live Site. Two maps showing the location of The Bay in relation to the Live Site are attached under Tab 4 of the Crown Book of Documents. 24 . The Bay had intended on remaining open for business until 9 p.m.

However, at 8 p.m., store director, Dana Hall, made the decision to close the store due to the large number of intoxicated people entering the store. 25 . At approximately 8:30 p.m., 911 began receiving phone calls from people who stated that The Bay was being damaged by large groups of people in the 600 block of West Georgia Street, and the 600 block of Seymour Street. Windows were reportedly being broken. The 911 calls are included on the DVD. 26 . At the time, there were still 70 to 80 employees within the store and some customers as well.

All of the employees and remaining customers were moved to the 7 th floor of the building for their safety.

27 . Several people from the crowd started throwing objects (newspaper boxes, City of Vancouver signs, hockey sticks etc.) at the windows. Just after 9 p.m., the windows started to break and shatter and people began entering The Bay through these broken windows and stealing merchandise. 28 . Ultimately, hundreds of people participated in the break in and looting of The Bay. 29 . A loss prevention officer working for The Bay, Duncan MacLellan, was one of the employees who remained on the main floor of the store to physically confront individuals as they entered the store.

He and other staff members spent almost two hours fighting with individuals, trying to protect employees trapped in The Bay, as well as rendering first aid to injured people outside the store. As a result of his actions, MacLellan suffered cuts to his hand which required stitches. The Victim Impact Statement of Duncan MacLellan is attached under Tab 8 of the Crown Book of Documents. 30 . At approximately 9:25 p.m., cars parked in the 600 block of Seymour Street, outside of The Bay, began to be vandalized. These vehicles were an Audi, an unmarked Ford Fusion police car and a BMW (the “Vehicles”).

The Vehicles were vandalized, set on fire and ultimately destroyed during the Riot. 31 . The smoke from the burning Vehicles entered the Bay, causing its fire alarm and sprinkler system to activate. This led some of the staff to believe that the building was on fire. All of the employees were then evacuated from the building. 32 . At approximately 10:30 p.m., with the arrival of the police in the 600 block of West Georgia Street, the last individuals looting The Bay left the store. 33 . The Bay suffered extensive damages as a result of the Riot.

All the ground floor windows and some second floor windows of The Bay were broken. There was damage to the outside canopy. There was a considerable amount of smoke and water damage on the ground floor and sub floors. There was significant merchandise loss, and construction repair. The financial loss to The Bay was $1,346,090.20. This loss is comprised of $431,730.67 in property stolen during the looting, $856,397.24 in physical damage to merchandise and the store itself, and $57,972.29 in other riot related costs (such as trauma counselling for employees). 34 .

Photographs of the damage are attached under Tab 6 of the Crown Book of Documents. 35 . The Victim Impact Statement of Store Director, Dana Hall, is attached under Tab 9 of the Crown Book of Documents. 36 . Ovando Renderos participated in rioting at the Hudson’s Bay Company, in the 600 block of West Georgia Street, by throwing objects at a window. His face was partially covered by his bandana while he did so. His involvement is depicted in the video clips included in the DVD. 37 .

Ovando Renderos was also located in the 600 block of Granville Street in front of a second broken Bay window, as depicted in the photographs included in the DVD. AUDI BCL#048PGT 38 . James Lawrence Currie (“Currie”) was the registered owner of a 2004 Black Audi A4 (BCLP 048PGT) (the “Audi”). 39 . On June 15, 2011, at approximately 5:30 p.m., Currie parked his Audi in the west side curb lane of the 600 block of Seymour Street, in front of the Bay. This location was two blocks northwest of the Live Site. 40 .

At approximately 9:25 p.m., cars parked in the 600 block of Seymour Street, outside of the Bay, including the Audi, began to be vandalized. The Audi was eventually set on fire and was completely destroyed.

41 . The total amount of damage done to the Audi was approximately $12,000.00. Currie’s Victim Impact Statement is included under Tab 10 of the Crown Book of Documents. 42 . Ovando Renderos participated in damaging the Audi by kicking it three times in the tail lights. This occurred after another male had placed a lit object in the front seat of the vehicle, and after a good Samaritan attempted to intervene to remove the incendiary object. Ovando Renderos’ face was partially covered by a bandana while he did so. His actions are depicted in the video clips included in the DVD. THE HUDSON BUILDING 43 .

The Hudson is a high rise residential and commercial tower located at 610 Granville Street that owns and leases store front property to: a. Yedina Clothing (620 Granville Street) b. Swimwear (630 Granville Street) c. Sterling Shoes (640 Granville Street) d. Mego Luggage (672 Granville Street) 44 . A map depicting the location of these stores is included in the Crown book of Documents at Tab 5. 45 . The Hudson is responsible for maintaining the store fronts for these locations including the front windows and doors. 46 .

On June 15, 2011,Yedina Clothing, Swimwear, Sterling Shoes, and Mego Luggage were all closed at the time of the riot. There were no staff on site, with the exception of the owners of Yedina, and the manager of Mego Luggage, Eric Fang, who returned to the store at approximately 10:25 p.m. while the riot was still on-going. 47 . Concierge Pearse Casey (“Casey”) was on duty at the Hudson, scheduled to work from 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. Numerous residents and guests were present in the building. Others had attended public events in the downtown area. 48 .

Following the game, residents streamed back to the building and reported rowdy crowds and vehicles on fire in the parking garage on Seymour Street, one block from the back of the building. Casey observed a fire started in a garbage can just up the block from the Hudson building. 49 . People became concerned for their safety, with residents gathering in the lobby and people from the street seeking refuge there. Casey estimated approximately one hundred people in the Hudson lobby. 50 . At approximately 10:00 p.m., crowds began breaking the windows of Hudsons’ commercial premises.

The general fire alarm went off in the Hudson building. 51 . The owners of Yedina approached Casey and asked for assistance. Due to the number of people attacking and looting the stores, he was unable to assist. 52 . All four business premises, Mego Luggage, Sterling Shoes, Swimwear, and Yedina Clothing, were severely damaged during the riot. 53 . The residential portion of the building did not suffer any damages, because residents of the building held the doors and secured the area.

54 . The General Manager for the Hudson Building, Leigh Follack, became aware of riotous behaviour in the area following the conclusion of the hockey game. He tried to attend at the building but was not immediately able to do so because the downtown core had been cordoned off by police. 55 . When Follack was able to arrive on scene, at approximately 11:15 p.m., he noted several windows had been broken and looting had taken place. He contacted an emergency restoration company due to the presence of blood, urine, vomit and broken glass in and around the building. 56 .

Restoration costs incurred by the Hudson, mainly for clean-up and repair of the store fronts, windows and doors, totaled approximately $27,000. 57 . A Victim Impact Statement was prepared by Follack, and attached at Tab 11 of the Crown Book of Documents. The Victim Impact Statement of Pearse Casey is attached at Tab 12. RIOTING AT STERLING SHOES 58 . Sterling Shoes is a retail shoe store, located at 640 Granville Street, in Vancouver. The store is situated on Granville Street between West Georgia Street to the South and Dunsmuir Street to the North.

The store was 3 blocks west and 1 block north of the Live Site. 59 . On June 15, 2011, Sterling Shoes was scheduled to be open from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. However, due to the large crowds that night, the store was closed at approximately 7:30 p.m. 60 . There were no employees present at the time of the riot and the store did not employ loss prevention officers. 61 . At approximately 10:00 p.m., the rioters began kicking and throwing debris and broken glass at the exterior glass doors and windows.

Within minutes, the rioters had smashed the windows, gained entry and stolen several thousands of dollars of merchandise. 62 . At approximately 11:30 p.m., Scott Schenkey, Facilities Manager for Sterling Shoes, began to receive alarm calls from the store. He was advised by Vancouver Police not to attend the store for his own safety as the crowds were not yet under control. Schenkey continued to receive alarm calls from the store until approximately 3:00 a.m. on June 16, 2011. 63 . Later that morning, Schenkey attended at the store. He described what he saw as a “nightmare”.

He observed blood in the store and on product, and a burnt mannequin inside. Shoes, cash and all of their purses had been stolen. The millwork had been damaged, shelving broken, and a television / marketing screen was damaged. The front door had been completely destroyed. 64 . Cst. Burhoe (VPD) attended the Sterling Shoes store on June 16, 2011 and photographed some of the damages to the store. Photographs are attached at Tab 7 of the Crown Book of Documents. 65 . It took four days for the business to become operational following the riot.

A team of people worked 14-16 hours a day for four days to clean-up and repair the store. 66 . The company incurred a loss of $33,765.21 in stolen and damaged goods. This includes the cost of damage inside the store, stolen merchandise ($15,714.87) and the total cost of non-saleable merchandise ($2,753.38). This did not include the cost of window and door replacements and most of the cleaning of the store, which was covered by the building landlord. It also does not include loss of revenue from being closed for four days, and the cost for staff to do an inventory to determine what was stolen. 67 .

A Victim Impact Statement was prepared by Schenkey, and is attached at Tab 14 of the Crown Book of Documents.

68 . Ovando Renderos participated in rioting at Sterling Shoes at approximately 10:00p.m. While wearing his bandana covering a portion of his face, he struck the glass door of Sterling Shoes with an object approximately five times. He then broke and entered into Sterling Shoes, entering through a broken glass window. Ovando Renderos went to the back of the store and selected three purses. He then exited the store, by way of the broken glass window, with the selected merchandise. His actions are depicted in the video clips included in the DVD. OVANDO RENDEROS’ ATTENDANCE AT THE VANCOUVER POLICE DEPARTMENT 69 .

On November 1, 2011, Ovando Renderos’ photograph was added to the Integrated Riot Investigation Team (“IRIT”) website and Riot Roundup Poster. 70 . On November 21, 2011, Ovando Renderos contacted the Vancouver Police Department and advised police that his mother had observed his photograph in the Riot Roundup Poster and directed him to turn himself into police. Arrangements were made for him to attend at the Vancouver Police Detachment. 71 . On November 29, 2011, Ovando Renderos attended at the Vancouver Police Department. He was arrested and provided his rights to counsel. 72 .

Ovando Renderos provided a statement and advised police that:

a) On June 15, 2011, he took the sky train downtown. He arrived about an hour before the game. He met up with his friend and they found a bar, called Sambas, close to Burrard Street station where they watched the game.

b) His friend left prior to the end of the hockey game. Ovando Renderos stayed and finished watching the game.

c) Approximately a half hour after the game ended [8:15 p.m.], Ovando Renderos walked down Robson Street and up to Granville Street and saw “this big mess going on there”.

d) He described the situation as “people going crazy”. He saw people burning cars, breaking windows, fighting, and pushing each other. As he put it, “Too much to even just focus on one thing”.

e) At some point, he says he was hit in the head by a flying object that resulted in a bump on his head.

f) He watched for awhile. He estimated approximately 30 minutes later, he jumped through the window [at Sterling Shoes] and “that’s all”.

g) He admitted to entering the store through a broken window.

h) He grabbed a purse from a shelf. It was attached to two other purses by a chain, all of which he subsequently took out of the store.

i) His intention was to sell the purse for profit.

j) Once he exited the store, he said he was approached by an unknown male who asked him for a purse. Ovando Renderos says he gave the male all three purses as they were still connected by a chain.

k) He said he was “pretty drunk”. He’d consumed a couple pitchers of beer. He is a regular drinker, and considered his alcohol consumption that night “a little more than normal”.

l) He stated he had a bandana with him.

m) He stated he was coughing because police were spraying tear gas and so he “put that on” and that’s when he saw the “broken window and people were in there” and so he went in.

n) He stated he took the bandana off after he left the area of Sterling Shoes approximately 20 minutes later.

o) He took the skytrain at Waterfront station to his sister’s house.

p) When asked if he was involved in any further incidents, he said, “That’s the only thing.” IMPACT OF THE RIOT 73 . Set out below is a

summary of the overall context and impact of the Riot on the City of Vancouver, its citizens and businesses.

74 . 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”). 75 .

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. 76 . 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. 77 . 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. 78 . 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. 79 . There were 116 arrests in the area of the Riot on June 15, 2011. 80 .

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); 81 . 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. 82 . 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 ___ day of October 2012, at the City of Vancouver, Province of British Columbia. Paige Morrow Lara Sarbit Counsel for Willmar Ovando-Renderez Counsel for the Crown CORRIGENDUM – Released January 11, 2013 In the Reasons for Judgment dated December 21, 2012, the following change has been made: [1] On page 10, paragraph 29, first sentence, the name “Mr. Hutchison” should be replaced with the name “Ms. Morrow”. It should now read as follows: Ms.

Morrow argued that a Conditional Sentence Order would meet the principles of sentencing in light of Mr. Ovando Renderos’ personal circumstances and the circumstances of the offence to which he pled guilty.