R. v. Thompson, 2017 BCPC 451

Citation: R. v. Thompson 2017 BCPC 451 Date: 20170203 File No: 42823-1 Registry: Penticton IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. FAYE-ANN MURIEL THOMPSON REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE SHAW Counsel for the Crown: A. Lerchs Counsel for the Defendant: M. Welsh Place of Hearing: Penticton , B.C. Date of Hearing: January 12, 2017 Date of Judgment: February 3, 2017 [ 1 ] This is my decision with respect to the trial on Information 42823-1 with Faye-Ann Muriel Thompson. On August 14, 2014, Mr. and Mrs. Hughes returned from a holiday to find their vehicle was missing and their house had been broken into while they were

away between the dates of August 4 to 14, 2014. The items missing from the home were a camera, $300 in cash, and Mrs. Hughes' pursewhich contained the spare keys for the stolen vehicle. [2] The Hughes reside in a remote location between Manning Park and Princeton off Highway No. 3 on Placer Mountain ForestryRoad. They have few neighbours. One neighbour lives across the river from them and two other neighbours up a hill, a distance awayfrom them.

The neighbours are mostly resident only on weekends. [3] At the time of the break and entry, the accused, Faye-Ann Thompson, and her boyfriend, Clint, were working at ManningPark. Thompson was working as a night auditor and had been at Manning Park since about the end of July. Clint was working inwoodcutting and mechanics. Her shifts were four-on and three-off and five-on and two-off.

She and Clint resided in Mission, B.C., butshe would reside in staff housing at Manning Park when she was working. [4] Thompson has been charged with the break and entry of the Hughes' residence as her fingerprint was found on the inside of asliding pane of glass at the Hughes' residence. The sliding pane of glass is located in the window to the master bedroom. Thompsondoes not dispute that the fingerprints that were found in the residence are her fingerprints. She admits she gained entry to the Hughes'house through the bedroom window.

She admits she entered the house, stepped on the bed, and opened the door for a male personwhose name she says is Jason. Thompson denies entering the residence for the purposes of committing a theft and she denies taking thecamera, the $300 in cash, and the purse with the car keys. [5] Thompson testified that on her days off, she and her boyfriend, Clint, would sometimes go hiking and adventuring by drivingaround various areas around Manning Park as they were exploring and learning about the area.

Thompson says, on some date in Augustof 2014, but she does not remember the exact date, she and her boyfriend went for one of these adventure drives. She says they ended upon a dirt road somewhere and she did not know exactly where they were. [6] She stated while they were driving on this dirt road, she and her boyfriend got into an argument and he dragged her by her hairout of the vehicle, slapped and punched her in the head. He took off and left her in the remote area. She says she was hurt with being hiton the back of the head, had hair missing, and a cut on her arm and leg.

She was bleeding with scratches and cuts. Thompson says shecried and then she started walking hoping Clint would return and pick her up. She says he did not return. She walked for over two hourstravelling back the way she and Clint had driven in along the major logging road. [7] When she was almost back to the Highway No. 3, she came to a bridge, saw a campsite with an RV or fifth wheel. However,no one was around. She then veered off the major logging road and began walking down another dirt road which was the Hughes'driveway.

The driveway is about one kilometre long from the Placer Mountain Forestry Road to the house. [8] Thompson says she eventually came to a locked gate and she went around it and went towards the house. She saw a man comearound the corner of the house. She said she was crying and she asked him to give her a ride as she works at Manning Park. He told herthat he would like to give her a ride, but he had locked himself out and his keys were on the counter in the house. There was a ladder.

He said he tried to get in through the window, but could not get himself up to the window and get through. [9] Thompson said she got a ladder and pushed the window open and went in. She went to the door and opened it for him. She didnot ask to use the phone. She did not ask to use the bathroom to clean herself up. When asked about this, she says she cleaned herself upin the river. Thompson never called the police despite being assaulted and abandoned in a remote area. [10] Thompson says the man identified himself as Jason.

She described him as in his late 30s to early 40s and gave a description thathe was wearing construction-like work clothes. Thompson said she asked for a glass of water and she got it herself. Thompson says shegot the water and then went out the patio door and went to the front of the house to sit on the steps to wait for Jason. Jason eventuallycame out of the house and he unlocked the Hyundai Sonata and she got into the passenger seat. Jason got into the driver's seat. Hedrove the car to the locked gate and she says they drove through and he locked the gate.

Thompson says she spent a maximum of 15minutes at the house. [11] Thompson says that Jason drove to the highway and then drove her home. Thompson testified Jason did not drive her toManning Park, but he agreed to drive her to Mission. She says Jason told her he had a construction contract in Abbotsford and he wouldbe working that evening so he agreed to drive her to Mission. Thompson was unable to explain why she would go with a stranger all theway to Mission rather than stopping at Manning Park after having suffered an assault from her boyfriend.

She says she had a cellphoneand that she was text-fighting with her boyfriend all on her way to Mission. The burned shell of the stolen vehicle was found by thepolice in the Mission area after the Hughes reported the theft. Issues [12] There is no doubt that Thompson was in the house and it was her fingerprints on the window. The issue to be determined iswhether the accused intended to break and enter and commit the offence of theft. The accused argues she was invited to enter theresidence and that she thought she was entitled to go in the house.

The Crown argues the version of facts given by the accused that sheended up at the residence because of an assault by her boyfriend at the same exact time that a man was attempting to break into theresidence is not believable and is implausible. [13] This is a case where credibility of the accused is at issue. As submitted by counsel for the accused, I must consider theprinciples set out in R. v. W.(D.), (SCC), 1991 1 S.C.R. 742 (S.C.C.). Those principles can be summarized as follows: 1. If I believe the accused, I must acquit. 2.

If I do not believe the testimony of the accused, but am left in a reasonable doubt by it, I must acquit. 3. Even if the accused's evidence does not raise a reasonable doubt, I must look to the whole of the evidence to determine whetherthe Crown has proven the material elements beyond a reasonable doubt.

[ 14 ] Here, the evidence is that the accused's fingerprints were found on the inside of a sliding glass window giving entry to the master bedroom. The accused admits she was in the house. The accused gives a version of facts which she says occurred where she was invited to enter the house through the window by a man she assumed was the owner of the house because he locked his keys in the house. [ 15 ] I have considered the entire testimony of the accused and I do not believe her version of events.

Considering her testimony in the context of the evidence as a whole, I am unable to believe her testimony that the events she says happened actually happened. I find that many of the actions the accused took after allegedly being assaulted resulting in injuries, particularly an aggressive pulling of the hair which resulted in some loss of hair, the punch to the back of the head, some scrapes and cuts, to not accord with common sense. [ 16 ] The accused had her cellphone with her as she testified she used her cellphone during her ride with Jason to text-fight with her boyfriend, Clint.

The accused never called the police or anyone for help even though Clint had assaulted her and left her in an isolated area. She did not seek any first aid or want an opportunity to clean up when the alleged owner of the residence invited her in. I find her actions were inconsistent with the description of the alleged assault and the injuries and the long over-two-hour walk and her description of how upset she was. [ 17 ] Thompson did not ask the stranger she met at the residence to take her back to the closest location where she stays when she is working, that being Manning Park.

She never asked to stop to collect any personal belongings. Rather, this fortuitous stranger, who had just stolen a car and money and a camera, drove her all the way to Mission where she and her boyfriend, Clint, resided together. The stranger just happened to be going to Abbotsford to work on a construction contract, reporting for work in the late evening. The version of events by the accused is simply unbelievable.

I find that the accused did not have a credible explanation as to why she did not go to the Manning Park staff residence or stop there. [ 18 ] On reviewing the entirety of the accused's evidence, taking into consideration the entire context of the evidence, I find the accused made rolling changes to her evidence depending on the questions that were asked. For instance, she testified she worked at Manning Park for two, maybe three, months.

She then changed her testimony on cross-examination stating she started working there at the end of July, but did not continue to work into September which then made her work at Manning Park to be about a month. [ 19 ] She was questioned whether she asked the owner of the residence if she could clean up after she had been assaulted and had walked for over two hours on a dirty forestry road and she testified she did not ask as she had cleaned up in a river. She testified she was fearful as she was out in an isolated area not knowing where she was, but she did not attempt to call for help, including the police.

I find it implausible that a person, who was just assaulted and injured and after walking for two hours, would veer off a major forestry road to a dirt road with no indication of what was at the end of the road, and continuing walking for a kilometre. On considering the evidence, I reject the testimony of the accused as being not believable. [ 20 ] Given the evidence of the fingerprints, the admissions of the accused that she was in the residence, I find that the accused in August of 2014 used the ladder to open the window to gain entry to the Hughes' residence.

She opened the glass window, entered the residence through the window, and committed an indictable offence therein, that being theft of a camera, purse, and $300. In the result, I find the accused guilty of Count 1 of Information 42823-1. ______________________ The Honourable M. Shaw Provincial Court Judge