R. v. Nosrat Date:, 2013 BCPC 136

Citation: R. v. Nosrat Date: 20130528 2013 BCPC 0136 File No: 223575-3-VC Registry: Vancouver IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. ATABAK NOSRAT EXCERPTS FROM PROCEEDINGS REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE C. BAGNALL Counsel for the Crown: M. Peacock Counsel for the Defendant: J. Percival Place of Hearing: Vancouver , B.C. Date of Hearing: May 28, 2013 Date of Judgment: May 28, 2013

[ 1 ] THE COURT: Atabak Nosrat was 25 years old when he participated in the riot in Vancouver on June 15, 2011. He has entered a plea of guilty to a charge laid under s. 65 of the Criminal Code , and he is to be sentenced today. [ 2 ] Mr. Nosrat grew up in a stable, supportive family and community. He is, and has been during his adulthood, gainfully employed. His employers report that he is hardworking and reliable. He is now training to become a plumber under the guidance of one of his brothers. He finished high school. He has no substance abuse issues. He has no criminal record.

He is a son, a brother, and a friend in this community, a young person with a good background and his life in front of him. [ 3 ] On June 15, 2011, Mr. Nosrat watched the final game of the Stanley Cup playoffs with friends in North Vancouver. He drank some alcohol while watching the game, but he was not intoxicated. [ 4 ] Leaving the address where he was, apparently he bumped into some past acquaintances, some people he knew from high school, and they all went downtown to see the riot. This is what he told the police. This is what he told the author of the pre-sentence report. Mr.

Nosrat remained in Vancouver for about an hour and a half. [ 5 ] When the London Drugs store on Granville Street had been broken into, Mr. Nosrat, along with hundreds of others, ran into the store and stole some small items. He came out and he threw them into the crowd. He did this twice. [ 6 ] Much of the store was destroyed by the rioters. The glass doors at the front of the store were smashed. The metal security gate was breached. Displays were overturned, and products were taken.

The total loss for London Drugs in inventory, payroll, and repair costs was in excess of $832,000. [ 7 ] Now, I make these comments not to lay blame for all of this at the feet of the offender, but the point about a riot is a very simple one: the acts of one are the acts of all because all contribute to what ultimately occurs. [ 8 ] In addition, the human cost was enormous. Because the riot was so extensive, emergency services were overwhelmed. Twenty-seven members of the London Drugs staff were in the store when the front entrance, which had been locked because of the crowds outside, was breached.

Those persons moved into a security room in the basement of the store and locked the door to that room. They had seen the rioters set a tree on fire just outside the store entrance, and they feared a fire being set in the store. If that had occurred, there was no escape for those people. They heard the rioters trying to open the locked door of the room that they were hiding in. They feared physical attack. They could see what was happening in the store on closed-circuit TV in that room. [ 9 ] Telephone calls made by one of the store security personnel were answered, but the police were not able to attend.

The last, that is, the third dispatcher who spoke with the store security officer from the London Drugs store told him that it would be his responsibility to take care of the trapped staff members and, it is somewhat chilling to hear, ultimately wished him good luck. [ 10 ] One of the people who was trapped in that room had this to say in her victim impact statement, and I am reading from Exhibit 1, Tab 3 [as read in]: There was also a small fire that the rioters had ignited prior to breaking into our store. My rationale at the time was, if they could set a tree on fire, they could set our store on fire.

Even though many people in the room remained stoic, you could see the fear in everyone's eyes. Many people were frantically texting loved ones, and there were tears from workers who did not know if they would make it out of the store alive. We were prepared for the worst case scenario, which were the rioters coming down into the loss prevention room to attack us. Thankfully, that did not occur, but it made everybody's anxiety levels go to the extreme. We continued to watch the group of individuals raid and loot our store. It was a surreal experience that you would think only happens in movies.

People were acting like wild animals. The majority of the workers of London Drugs were honestly scared for their lives. [ 11 ] Another one of the workers wrote this. This is at Exhibit 1, Tab 6 [as read in]: I have been an employee for London Drugs for 25 years. My workplace was always a safe, secure, and comfortable place to be. It was like my second home. That was completely shattered on June 15th, 2011, when a group of people thought it was their right to break through our locked door and destroy and rob our store.

To be told to run downstairs and be locked into our security room, thinking that was our only safe spot in the store, was terrifying. [ 12 ] And another one of the employees wrote this. This is at Tab 7 [as read in]: I returned to work on June 17th and was very uncomfortable being at the store and in the vicinity because I had seen it practically destroyed. It felt like seeing my home destroyed. I was disgusted and sad. [ 13 ] It is difficult to avoid feelings of disgust when watching the scene on the streets of Vancouver and, in particular, at the entrance to the London Drugs store.

Sons, brothers, friends of this community, otherwise good and decent people, became completely disinhibited and engaged in massive destruction of the core of this city for the fun of it, as a thrill. The atmosphere, apparent when Exhibit 2 is viewed, was of a carnival. Cars were burning, businesses were being broken into and looted, but the crowd was cheerful. People were thoroughly enjoying themselves, having fun. [ 14 ] Mr. Nosrat, along with every other rioter who entered the London Drugs store, contributed to the devastation of that store and the terror of the 27 people trapped in the basement, for fun.

[15] The greater context of the riot was described in submissions in these proceedings and has been described elsewhere, and I do notintend to recite the various details here. The number of riot events, the value of the damage, the number of emergency personneldeployed, the number of individuals who were trapped or terrorized or assaulted or whose property was destroyed, these numbers, bysheer repetition, have lost their capacity to accurately describe the extent of the riot and the lawlessness of the rioters. [16] I have read and considered the cases provided to me by counsel for the Crown.

I was not provided with cases by the defence,but I do not think it was necessary for any further cases to be put before the court. The B.C. Court of Appeal had this to say in R. v.Peepre, 2013 BCCA 115 - and of course, this case deals with this very riot and the actions of another person involved - at paragraph 27: [27] Special considerations apply to sentences imposed for participation in a riot.

Sentencing an offender for participation in criminalacts that involve widespread public disorder requires a court to look not only at the offender's individual conduct, but also the broadercontext in which the individual participated. A rioter is culpable for not only his own conduct: he bears, in a general way, a share ofresponsibility for the more widespread acts of lawlessness in which he participated: see R. v. Loewen (1992), (BCCA), 75 C.C.C. (3d) 184, 15 B.C.A.C. 42; R. v. Simpson, [2005] A.W.L.D. (Q.B.), aff'd 2004 ABCA 390.

Citizens of Vancouver andmembers of the larger community present at the scene of the Stanley Cup riot were terrorized by the acts of violence to persons andproperty that occurred. That violence, and the public's consequential feeling that law and order had been cast aside, is significant in ourconsideration of the fitness of Mr. Peepre's sentence. Participation in a riot is a deliberate criminal act that has grave consequences forthe safety and security of our community.

The corollary of that fact is that those who participate must expect to be punished severely.By using the deterrent and denunciatory effects of sentencing in a manner that accounts for the current conditions in and values of thecommunity, courts can discourage individuals from participating in acts of public violence and, hopefully, prevent the reoccurrence ofevents like the Stanley Cup riot. [17] Aggravating factors here include that Mr. Nosrat came into the city after he knew there was a riot occurring.

He ought to havestayed away. [18] His actions contributed to the reasonable and very serious terror experienced by the London Drugs staff and to the crippling oflocal emergency services. [19] Mitigating factors include that he entered a plea of guilty to this very serious charge. He cooperated with the police once theyidentified him, although he did not turn himself in, and I have taken into account that his actions were less egregious than the actions ofmany rioters. [20] Counsel have jointly submitted that Mr. Nosrat should serve three months' incarceration by way of a conditional sentenceorder.

I am of the view that with certain strict conditions attached, a conditional sentence order is not inappropriate here. In order toaddress the principles of denunciation and deterrence, in my view, a jail sentence is necessary. But Mr. Nosrat would not endanger thecommunity were he to serve his sentence out of custody and, as I say, with strict conditions; the focus on those two principles ofsentencing is not lost. [21] Mr. Nosrat, would you stand up now, please. [22] You are going to serve three months by way of a conditional sentence order.

The statutory conditions will apply, and I will addthe following. [23] You will not be outside your residence between the hours of 8 p.m. one day and 6 a.m. the next day each day and following dayof the week. [24] You will present yourself at the door of your residence and answer your telephone when any police officer or peace officer or aconditional sentence supervisor attends at your residence or telephones you for the purposes of determining your compliance with theconditions of this order. I will just pause to say, effectively, Mr.

Nosrat, that means you answer the door and you answer the phone. [25] You will not enter any London Drugs store. [26] You will neither possess nor consume alcohol nor any drugs except those prescribed for you by a doctor or a dentist. [27] I am also going to place Mr. Nosrat on probation for a period of 12 months.

The statutory conditions will apply, and I will addthe following. [28] Within 72 hours of the commencement of this order, he will report to the probation office at 275 East Cordova Street,Vancouver, B.C., and thereafter as directed. [29] He will perform 50 hours of community work service within the first nine months of this order as directed by his probationofficer. [30] He will not enter any London Drugs store. [31] With respect to the conditional sentence order, Madam Registrar, I'm sorry; I should have said that Mr.

Nosrat will have twobusiness days to report to his supervisor. [32] THE CLERK: Thank you, Your Honour. [33] THE COURT: These orders will be prepared in writing. They will be read and explained to the offender. Copies will be givento him. I delegate to the clerk of the court the other responsibilities I have under the Criminal Code. [34] There will be no surcharge with respect to this matter.

[ 35 ] Ms. Peacock, you want to stay Counts 2 and 3; do you? [ 36 ] MS. PEACOCK: Yes, please, Your Honour. Thank you. (REASONS CONCLUDED)