R. v. Oliver, 2023 BCPC 162

Citation: R. v. Oliver 2023 BCPC 162 Date: 20230310 File No: 264696-1 Registry: Vancouver IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REX v. RICHARD SEAN OLIVER ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE P. LA PRAIRIE Counsel for the Crown: K. Gallo Counsel for the Defendant: L.D. Myers, K.C. and E. Ariaee, Articled Student Place of Hearing: Vancouver , B.C.

Date of Hearing: March 10, 2023Date of Sentence: March 10, 2023 [1] THE COURT: Richard Oliver has entered a guilty plea to one count of criminal harassment contrary to s. 264 of the CriminalCode. The offence took place between March 20, 2020, and September 2021 in Vancouver, and the victim is Jody Vance. Ms. Vance is afreelance journalist who works in both radio and TV. The circumstances of the offence are as follows. [2] Beginning in March of 2020 when the COVID pandemic first started, Ms. Vance started received emails from several differentemail addresses critical of her coverage of the COVID pandemic.

The emails escalated in tone and created a concern for her safety. Sheresponded three times to the sender of the emails to stop and this occurred between March 2020 and April 2020. She advised that shewould contact the police. She reported the emails to her employer, but did not know who the sender was. The emails continued forseveral months and Ms. Vance did not respond any further to them. [3] Emails were sent to her co-workers, guests on her shows, and her supervisors. The police obtained copies of the emails. Therewere over a hundred in total between March 21, 2020, and October 21, 2020.

Different addresses were used by the sender of the emails.Some of the emails referred to Ms. Vance in the title of the email addresses such as "Jodyswallowswell@gmail.com." The emailsdisagreed with Ms. Vance's coverage of the pandemic. The communications went beyond simply views and became aggressive andthreatening in nature. They refer to things such a "day of reckoning." Ms. Vance's image was included in some of the emails and theemails were circulated to various other individuals besides Ms. Vance. [4] Mr. Oliver was eventually identified as the sender of the emails after a guest on one of Ms.

Vance's shows was able to determinewho the emails were coming from. This was reported to the police. The police contacted Mr. Oliver on October 26, 2020, and warnedhim not to contact Ms. Vance any further. He stopped sending emails to her, but he continued to send emails to her colleagues and guests.Charges were laid September 21, 2021, and Mr. Oliver was arrested. He has been on bail since February of 2022 and there have been noissues with his compliance on bail. [5] I have reviewed a sample of the emails sent to Ms. Vance. The emails are misogynistic. They are threatening in nature.

Theyreference her family and, in particular, her son. There are altered photos of Ms. Vance included in the emails. The emails are disturbingand were copied to numerous colleagues of Ms. Vance. Mr. Oliver may have disagreed with the media coverage of the COVIDpandemic, but there is no place in a civil society for misogynistic, threatening, and demeaning emails of this nature. [6] This is not a proper way for Mr. Oliver to address his disagreement with media coverage of the pandemic. Sending anonymousemails of this nature represents a cowardly way to vent his frustrations on Ms.

Vance who was simply carrying out her duties as ajournalist. Mr. Oliver's actions went beyond an expression of his beliefs and turned to criminal conduct by criminally harassing Ms.Vance, her family, colleagues, and guests of her shows over an extended period of time. This type of criminal behaviour cannot and willnot be tolerated in our society. [7] Mr. Oliver is 53 years old. He works as a computer technician and an online trader. Mr. Oliver does not have a criminal record.He is married with three children. His youngest child, age seven, suffers from scoliosis and requires medical treatment in the U.S.A.

Mr.Oliver frequently travels with his son to Portland to the Shriners Hospital for medical treatment. A criminal record could affect his abilityto cross the border. [8] Mr. Oliver has entered a guilty plea which is a mitigating factor. He has no criminal record. He has been on bail since February2022 without any issues. He is willing to follow court-imposed conditions. [9] The frequency and tone of the communications with Ms. Vance constitutes an aggravating factor. Mr. Oliver continued to harassMs. Vance and others after she requested him to stop. The events have affected Ms.

Vance, her family, colleagues, and guests of hershow. A victim impact statement has been provided to the court by Ms. Vance which she read into the record and a copy was filed as anexhibit. Ms. Vance provided an articulate and thorough rendering of how this offence has affected her, her family, colleagues, and guestsfrom her show. [10] What is particularly troubling is the effect the offence has had on Ms. Vance's family and the actions that had to be taken toprotect her son from an unknown and then later a known predator including at school. To state that this offence has had a significantimpact on Ms.

Vance and her family is an understatement. As someone with young children of his own, I hope that Ms. Vance's eloquentwords have an impact on Mr. Oliver over his predatory actions. [11] The Crown and defence propose a joint submission on sentence. The joint submission is for a conditional discharge with 12months' probation including counselling and no contact with Ms. Vance. There is also a mandatory s. 109 firearms prohibition for 10years.

The parties argue that the imposition of a conditional discharge is not contrary to the public interest and is in the interests of Mr.Oliver applying the principles set out in R. v. Fallofield, (BC CA), 1973 CarswellBC 184 (B.C.C.A.). [12] The Crown and defence rely upon the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Anthony-Cook, 2016 SCC 43, in supportof their position that the proposed joint submission is appropriate in the circumstances. In Anthony-Cook, Justice Moldaver, writing forthe court, addresses the significance of joint submissions in the criminal justice system.

At paragraph 25, he comments: It is an accepted and entirely desirable practice for Crown and defence counsel to agree to a joint submission on sentence in exchange fora plea of guilty. Agreements of this nature are commonplace and vitally important to the well-being of our criminal justice system, aswell as our justice system at large. Generally, such agreements are unexceptional and they are readily approved by trial judges withoutany difficulty.

[ 13 ] Further, at paragraph 32, Justice Moldaver notes: … a trial judge should not depart from a joint submission on sentence unless the proposed sentence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute or is otherwise contrary to the public interest. [ 14 ] Lastly, at paragraph 44, Justice Moldaver opines: Crown and defence counsel are well placed to arrive at a joint submission that reflects the interests of both the public and the accused … As a rule, they will be highly knowledgeable about the circumstances of the offender and the offence and the strengths and weaknesses of their respective positions.

The Crown is charged with representing the community’s interest in seeing that justice is done … Defence counsel is required to act in the accused’s best interests, which includes ensuring that the accused’s plea is voluntary and informed … And both counsel are bound professionally and ethically not to mislead the court … In short, they are entirely capable of arriving at resolutions that are fair and consistent with the public interest … [ 15 ] The Crown and defence have engaged in extensive plea negotiations to resolve this matter.

The sentence proposed addresses denunciation and deterrence as well as rehabilitation and protective conditions for Ms. Vance and her associates. Adopting the comments of Justice Moldaver in Anthony-Cook , I find no reason to reject the joint position proposed by counsel in this case. I will accede to the joint submission. [ 16 ] Mr. Oliver, if you could please stand? [ 17 ] There will be a conditional discharge and I will place you on probation for a period of 12 months with the following conditions: 1. Keep the peace and be of good behaviour. 2. Appear before the court when required to do so by the court. 3.

Notify the court or the probation officer in advance of any change of name or address and promptly notify the court or the probation officer of any change of employment or occupation. 4. You must report in person to a probation officer at 275 East Cordova Street in Vancouver, B.C., by March 13, 2023, at 3:00 p.m. After that you must report as directed by your probation officer. 5. You must have no contact or communication directly or indirectly with Jody Vance, Jesse Miller, Keith Baldrey, Jason Kindrachuk, or Marcella Bernardo or with any Corus Entertainment staff member or contractor. 6.

You must not go to any place where Jody Vance, Jesse Miller, Keith Baldrey, Jason Kindrachuk, or Marcella Bernardo lives, works, attends school, or worships, or happens to be. If you see them, you must leave their presence immediately without any words of gestures. 7. You must attend, participate in, and complete any intake, assessment, counselling, or education program as directed by your probation officer. 8.

You must not possess directly or indirectly any weapon as defined by the Criminal Code , including any firearms and ammunition; crossbows, prohibited or restricted weapons or devices, 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 of all the above, including any compressed airguns or BB/pellet guns; or any related authorizations, licences, and registration certificates and you must not apply for any of these. [ 18 ] So, Mr.

Oliver, I have to have you confirm on the record, do you understand and agree to comply with all of these terms of your probation? [ 19 ] THE ACCUSED: Yes, Your Honour. [ 20 ] THE COURT: All right. I have to advise you, if you fail to comply with the terms of your probation, the Crown can lay additional criminal charges and a warrant could be issued for your arrest and, as this is a conditional discharge, the Crown could also seek to have you come back to court and actually sentenced on the offence instead of receiving a discharge.

Do you understand all of that? [ 21 ] THE ACCUSED: Yes, Your Honour. [ 22 ] THE COURT: All right. So that dispenses with his signature on the probation order. [ 23 ] There is a 10-year prohibition pursuant to s. 109 for firearms; and the victim fine surcharge, Mr. Myers, I take it, it will not cause an undue hardship on your client? [ 24 ] CNSL L. MYERS: No, and I thank you for asking. [ 25 ] THE COURT: All right, thank you. So the victim fine surcharge is payable. [ 26 ] Anything further? [ 27 ] CNSL L. MYERS: I -- [ 28 ] CNSL K. GALLO: No, nothing.

[ 29 ] CNSL L. MYERS: I'm sorry, I know you have already passed judgment, but it comes to mind that, if it's of any assistance to Ms. Vance, paragraphs 5 and -- conditions 5 and 6, "You must have no contact or communication directly or indirectly with Jody Vance or her family" -- [ 30 ] THE COURT: Okay, I will make that amendment, as well, "With Ms. Vance or her family." [ 31 ] CNSL L. MYERS: -- and also, number 6, as well, "Jody Vance or her family." [ 32 ] THE COURT: Yes, for both five and six. [ 33 ] CNSL L. MYERS: Yes. [ 34 ] THE COURT: Okay, thank you. [ 35 ] CNSL L.

MYERS: Thank you for hearing me. [ 36 ] THE COURT: Yes, thank you, Mr. Myers. [ 37 ] CNSL K. GALLO: Thank you, Your Honour. [ 38 ] THE COURT: All right, thank you. [ 39 ] CNSL L. MYERS: Thanks for coming all the way out. [ 40 ] THE COURT: My pleasure. (REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)