R. v. G.H.C., 2022 BCPC 286

Citation: R. v. G.H.C. 2022 BCPC 286 Date: 20221110 File Nos: 111164-1 36678-1 Registry: Merritt and Fort St. John IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REX v. G.H.C. REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE R.D. PHILLIPS Counsel for the Crown: T. Livingston Counsel for the Defendant: A. Lagemaat Place of Hearing: Kamloops , B.C. Date of Hearing: September 22, 2022 Date of Judgment: November 10, 2022

[ 1 ] G.H.C. is before the court for sentencing having entered guilty pleas to the following. Information 36878-1 [ 2 ] Count 1: G.H.C., from the 7 th day of February, 2020 to the 27 th day of August, 2020, inclusive, at or near Fort St. John, in the Province of British Columbia, did manufacture or transfer a prohibited firearm, a restricted firearm or a non-restricted firearm, prohibited weapon, prohibited device, or ammunition, restricted firearms, knowing that he was not authorized to do so under the Firearms Act , or any other Act of Parliament or any regulation made under any Act of Parliament, contrary to Section 99(1) (

a) of the Criminal Code . Circumstances [ 3 ] On June 2020, an investigation began after members of the National Weapons Enforcement Support Team (NWEST) were alerted to suspicious restricted firearm purchases being made by G.H.C., who lived in Fort St. John, British Columbia. G.H.C. possessed a valid PAL-R license, meaning he could legally purchase restricted firearms. [ 4 ] The restricted firearms, date of purchase, and retail values were: a. Girsan MC28 semi-automatic pistol, February 7, 2020, $400; b. Norinco NP22 semi-automatic pistol, March 25, 2020, $395; c.

Glock 17 semi-automatic pistol, April 21, 2020, $829; d. Four Girsan MC28 semi-automatic pistols, May 14, 2020, $1,600; e. SIG Sauer P320 semi-automatic pistol, May 19, 2020, $500; f. Glock 48 semi-automatic pistol, May 20, 2020, $720; g. Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol, May 28, 2020, $700; h. Two Ruger Pistol Caliber Carbines and one Glock 17 semi-automatic pistol, June 2, 2022, $1,848; and i. Glock 17 semi-automatic pistol, July 11, 2020, $829. [ 5 ] In total, G.H.C. purchased 11 pistols and two carbines. All of the firearms had restricted status.

The total retail value of the firearms purchased, before tax was $7,821. [ 6 ] It was subsequently learned that G.H.C. purchased two additional firearms in Grand Prairie, Alberta on August 17. These were a Ruger Wrangler single action revolver and a German sport firefly semiautomatic pistol. No information has been received regarding the retail value of these restricted firearms. [ 7 ] As a result of this information on August 27, 2020, the Fort St. John RCMP executed a public safety search warrant of G.H.C.’s residence.

G.H.C. was located and detained for firearms trafficking and was arrested shortly thereafter for the same after telling police that he did not have any firearms in his house, though, by law, he should have been in possession of 22 restricted firearms, including firearms purchased prior to February 7, 2020. [ 8 ] The search did locate a Robinson Arms rifle, along with nine magazines, including two magazines that were altered to allow the 20 rounds of: 308 calibre ammunition to be loaded, making them prohibited devices.

Additional magazines were also located, all loaded and all altered to hold between 20 and 50 rounds of: 308 calibre ammunition. An additional eight magazines containing 9 mm ammunition were also located. Each of these magazines were altered to hold between 17 and 20 rounds of ammunition. [ 9 ] On arrest, G.H.C. gave a warning statement. He denied selling any firearms, claiming that he had disabled and thrown out the firearms purchased. Eventually, G.H.C. admitted to selling the firearms. G.H.C. contacted potential buyers via text. As a purchase was arranged, G.H.C. would leave the guns in his car in the alley.

When he returned to the car, he would find cash in the place of the guns, which would be gone. In total, G.H.C. admitted to selling 11 firearms. The guns were sold for profit gaining him $100 for the Ruger, $500 for the Glocks, $400 for the Girsan. [ 10 ] G.H.C. was released on a police undertaking with a $500 cash deposit on August 28, 2020.

Terms of that Undertaking included a term that prohibited him from possessing any firearm, prohibited weapon or ammunition, and required him to surrender such things to the RCMP by 4:00 p.m. that day. [ 11 ] As I have said, G.H.C. engaged in the sale of restricted and prohibited firearms for profit. From the Gladue Report (p14) G.H.C. describes this activity as follows: I brought firearms legally and then they ended up being prohibited by the law shortly after. I ended up selling a firearm to an old trucker and then ended up selling another one and the profit margin was extremely good on that end.

I was getting them so cheap and then started selling. I knew people from previous connections and spiraled out of control, some pretty heavy dudes found out what I was doing showed up at my place and you don’t tell these guys ‘No’. I ended up selling a bunch back to back there. [ 12 ] I will note that during an interview with Cst. Rissanen, G.H.C. was asked what he would say to a person shot by a firearm that he

sold - G.H.C. responded by stating “He wouldn’t say anything and would have no remorse, as it is in his nature not to worry about stuff like this”. [ 13 ] As well, I am mindful that the offences set out in this information were committed while G.H.C. was subject to release conditions for 2020 offences. [ 14 ] Additionally, G.H.C. entered guilty pleas to the following: Information 111164-1 [ 15 ] Count 1: G.H.C., on or about the 6th day of June, 2021, at or near Merritt, in the Province of British Columbia, did have in his possession property, 2020 Ford F350, the property of [omitted for publication] First Nation, of a value in excess of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) knowing that the said property was obtained by the commission in Canada of an offence punishable by indictment, contrary to

Section 355 (

a) of the Criminal Code . [ 16 ] Count 2: G.H.C., on or about the 6 th day of June, 2021, at or near Merritt, in the Province of British Columbia, did have in his possession, 2020 East Texas Dump Trailer, the property of [omitted for publication], of a value in excess of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) knowing that the said property was obtained by the commission in Canada of an offence punishable by indictment, contrary to

section 355 (

a) of the Criminal Code . [ 17 ] Count 3: G.H.C., on or about the 6 th day of June, 2021, at or near Merritt, in the Province of British Columbia, did possess a loaded prohibited or restricted firearm, Robinson Armament XCR-L, with readily accessible ammunition capable of being discharged in the firearm, without being the holder of an authorization or a licence under which he may possess the prohibited firearm in that place and a registration certificate for the firearm, contrary to Section 95(1) of the Criminal Code . [ 18 ] Count 4: G.H.C., on or about the 6 th day of June, 2021, at or near Merritt, in the Province of British Columbia, did by criminal negligence cause bodily harm to A.C., contrary to

Section 221 of the Criminal Code . [ 19 ] Count 5: G.H.C., on or about the 6 th day of June, 2021, at or near Merritt, in the Province of British Columbia, did discharge a restricted or prohibited firearm at Cst. Bodner, Cst. Julyan, Cst. Maciejewski, Cst. Gerein and Cpl. Hedrick, with intent to maim or disfigure, or to endanger the life of a person, Cst. Bodner, Cst. Julyan, Cst. Maciejewski, Cst. Gerein and Cpl. Hedrick, or to prevent the arrest or detention of any person, contrary to section 244(2) (

a) of the Criminal Code . Circumstances [ 20 ] The circumstances of these offences are quite egregious. [ 21 ] On Sunday, June 6, 2021 at 12:07, Merritt RCMP received information that included a photo of an adult Indigenous male with a blue shirt and black shorts standing behind orange Sea-Can suggesting a possible theft out of Lytton. The information led the RCMP to believe the Sea-Can might be on Saddleman Road near Quilchena. [ 22 ] At Saddleman Road, the police observed the Sea-Can on a trailer attached to a white pickup truck.

The truck was described as a white super duty pickup truck with a red tidy tank (fuel tank) on the back. The pickup truck was towing a flatbed trailer with a gooseneck hitch and had three axles. Constable Bodner made attempts to read the plate on the trailer but was partially obstructed, so he called the Merritt RCMP detachment and requested someone to bring binoculars. [ 23 ] At approximately 3:50 p.m., the white pickup truck and flatbed trailer crashed through the chain-link fence gate at the front of the Saddleman property.

Constable Bodner narrowly avoided being hit by the pickup truck and flatbed trailer by swerving his marked police vehicle towards the ditch. The pickup truck headed northbound on Highway 5A but Cst. Bodner lost sight of the vehicle, so he advised RCMP telecoms that a white pickup truck with a tidy tank towing a trailer that failed to stop for him. [ 24 ] Just before 5:00 p.m., Cst. Julyan observed the white pickup truck but without the trailer, travelling south on Highway 5A back towards Merritt. Constable Julyan did not initiate a pursuit and followed the truck 6 to 10 kilometres behind.

Constable Davey of the Merritt RCMP set up a spike belt on Highway 5A south at Quilchena. At 5:10 p.m., the pickup truck travelled over the spike belt then continued to drive south. [ 25 ] At this point, G.H.C.’s actions were being recorded by the RCMP and the recording was played back in court. [ 26 ] From the recording, Cst. Bodner is on the radio advising that the tires of the pickup truck were disintegrating. At approximately 5:12 p.m., he reports that the driver has fired shots at him from the truck. He pulls off the road and Cst. Davey overtakes him.

The truck then stops near Nicola Ranch, where the driver gets out, stands in the middle of Highway 5A, and is shooting at police. The audio makes it clear that G.H.C. is firing bursts of bullets from the firearm. [ 27 ] The truck then leaves Nicola Ranch, passing Cst. Maciejewski who is blocking eastbound traffic. G.H.C. fires at Cst. Maciejewski. The truck then travels through Merritt, turning on Highway 8 towards Spences Bridge. Further shots are fired before the truck comes to a halt on Highway 8.

By this time, other police officers have arrived and a gunfight ensues. [ 28 ] At some point, a person got out of the passenger side of the truck. This person turned out to be G.H.C.’s 11-year-old son, A.C. It was apparent to Cst. Bodner, looking through binoculars, that A.C. was injured. He was directed to make his way towards police. Because this was an active shooting scene, there was no ambulance nearby. Accordingly, Cst.

Gerein took A.C. into her police car and rushed him to the hospital. [ 29 ] G.H.C., who had been on the driver side of the truck shooting at the police, eventually held out a white shirt to indicate he was

surrendering. He was eventually arrested. A search incidental to arrest resulted in a crack pipe and suspected drugs located in G.H.C.’s pocket. [ 30 ] G.H.C. had been shot in the stomach. Constable David Feller, trained as a military medic, provided first aid until an ambulance arrived. G.H.C. was then taken in custody to the hospital. After being treated and discharged he has remained in custody since. [ 31 ] A.C. was treated at the Merritt Hospital. He had lacerations to his left and right chest wall and to his wrist caused by ricocheting bullets.

An x-ray revealed a piece of shrapnel was located in his left chest wall. Due to his injuries, A.C. was transported by helicopter to the Royal Inland Hospital in Kamloops for further evaluation and treatment. [ 32 ] It appears A.C. has recovered from his physical injuries and is now being cared for by his older sister K.D. who at age 21 has become a parent to him. As set out in the presentence report, A.C. is an amazing kid who has “handled things very well all things considered, but that it was heart breaking for him”.

I understand he attends regular counselling sessions to deal with this traumatic event. [ 33 ] At the time of these events G.H.C. was using a Robinson armament XCR-L rifle chambered for .223 calibre ammunition. It is a prohibited firearm. When G.H.C. was arrested it held a magazine loaded with 21 rounds, which is also prohibited. There was also a round loaded into the rifle chamber that had apparently misfired. The firearm had also been modified to allow for fully automatic fire.

This is reflected on the video, particularly the portion from Nicola Ranch where the gun can be heard firing multiple rounds of ammunition in rapid succession. [ 34 ] The pickup truck was a Ford F350 and was the property of the [omitted for publication] near Fort St. John, who purchased it on February 17, 2021 for $74,000. The truck was reported stolen on May 22, 2021. The truck was heavily damaged from being driven on its rims for a long distance and by the bullets that struck during the Hwy 8 shoot out with police. [ 35 ] The trailer is a 2020 East Texas dump trailer.

It was stolen from [omitted for publication] in Fort St. John on June 1, 2021. The estimated value of the trailer is $28,000. I understand this trailer was returned to the owner. [ 36 ] Fortunately, no police officers were injured however, all police officers involved were off work for some time as they processed and dealt with the trauma of having to discharge their firearms at another human being and coming close to being shot themselves, while in the line of duty. [ 37 ] It was a miracle no one else was injured either by G.H.C.’s reckless driving or by being hit by stray bullets fired by G.H.C.

The shooting occurred on a provincial highway with residences nearby. The final shoot out occurred within [omitted for publication], an Indigenous community near Merritt. Circumstances of Offender [ 38 ] G.H.C. is 47 years of age and was born in Merritt, British Columbia. He is a member of the [omitted for publication], a remote Indigenous community situated 300 kilometres north of Vancouver and is accessible by boat or float plane only. [ 39 ] G.H.C. has a son, A.C. and a stepdaughter in her early 20s who, with her partner, are now caring for A.C. [ 40 ] G.H.C.’s mother is Indigenous and from the same community.

His father is non-indigenous. He is the only child of his parent’s, however, he has seven other half-siblings, two of which are deceased. G.H.C.’s parents separated when he was eight. While G.H.C. is a member of [omitted for publication], he has never lived there. Most of his childhood and adult life has been spent in Merritt and the Lower Mainland. [ 41 ] G.H.C.’s father was a ranch hand in the Nicola Valley. At age 14, G.H.C. changed his residence from Vancouver, with his mother to Merritt to live and work with this dad on a local ranch. G.H.C. carried on the ranch hand life as an adult.

He also spent time logging and working in the north as a hunting guide. [ 42 ] G.H.C. lost two brothers who played a significant role in his upbringing as they were present while his mother and father went their separate ways and journeys. The passing of his brothers was very difficult on G.H.C. [ 43 ] Things picked up for G.H.C. in Nelson, where he met the mother of A.C. They lived a good life there for a while, gainfully employed. Unfortunately, both G.H.C. and his wife became addicted to drugs and went their separate ways.

At the time of this offence, G.H.C.’s view of his ex-wife and mother of A.C., is that she is an unfit mother. Criminal Record [ 44 ] G.H.C.’s criminal record is dated. He was convicted in 1999 for impaired driving, in 2003 for ACBH where he received a suspended sentence with probation. As well, he has a conviction for failing to comply with probation in 2005 and a theft under in 2004 and 2006. Reports [ 45 ] The court has been provided with three reports for G.H.C. [ 46 ] The first report is a pre-sentence report (the “PSR”) prepared on May 11, 2022 by Lindsay Jardine.

From this report, I note the following: Despite having quit school in Grade 10, G.H.C. presents as ambitious and intelligent and is described by a close friend as being knowledgeable in many subjects. The writer states that G.H.C. involvement in the offences suggest that at times, he lacks the ability to manage difficult emotions or challenging situations in a healthy manner without resorting to violence and that a lack of impulse control by failing to consider the possible ramification of his actions including the potential for his son to be injured.

[ 47 ] G.H.C. became addicted to crack cocaine in 2001 after the passing of a brother. He managed to quit on his own for a bit then started up with cocaine again. By 2019 and to the offence date, G.H.C. was using one gram of cocaine per day, two to three times per week and one gram of crystal meth per day. [ 48 ] As for G.H.C.’s attitude towards the offences, the writer states: G.H.C. maintains that his mental state at the time of the index offences was poor due to his crystal meth addiction and marital problems.

He maintains that he was transporting a stolen vehicle and stolen dump trailer to the Coast and had planned to sell his gun at the same time. He says he detoured to Merritt on a whim to show A.C. where he grew up. He recalls that once police realized he had stolen goods, he became fixated on getting his son A.C. to his cousin’s house in Merritt, as he believed his son would be safe there. G.H.C. affirms that he fired at RCMP because they were pursuing him closely on bad roads and he thought they were endangering A.C.

He claims that after the truck stopped running, he fired at police because he felt they were going to fire at him. He also said he doesn’t know why he did it, cites drug usage, being awake for 3 days, and not thinking clearly. [ 49 ] G.H.C. shows a lack of accountability for his actions on this day. He does not discuss the seriousness of taking his son on a long trip in a stolen vehicle from Fort St. John to Vancouver and driving with his son while using stimulants and not sleeping for the previous three days.

Nor does he discuss the seriousness of engaging in an exchange of bullets with the police while his son was present and could be injured and or traumatized witnessing his father get inured (both of which happened). [ 50 ] The second report is a mental health assessment completed on May 16, 2022 by Dr. Lessing. This report was not referred to by counsel in sentencing however it was ordered. I will only refer to the impression

section of this report where Dr.

Lessing states: • G.H.C. is a 47 year old man with a family and personal history of significant drug addiction (marijuana, alcohol and stimulants specifically cocaine and methamphetamine). • He describes the index offence as the result of this addiction, social pressures, relationship stressors and peer influences inherent in the drug-involved lifestyle. • G.H.C. would like to change things and is actively seeking addiction treatment at KRCC. • G.H.C. reports no past concerns with major mental illness. [ 51 ] The third report is a Gladue Report completed on July 29, 2022 setting out the Indigenous and background factors for the court to consider. [ 52 ] Many of G.H.C.s family members (on his mother’s side), including his grandparents, mother, aunts and uncles attended the [omitted for publication] Indian Residential School. [ 53 ] R.C., G.H.C.’s mother recalls her time at residential school and shared that she was seven years of age when she attended residential school along with most of her 14 siblings.

The three youngest siblings went into foster care after their parents were murdered by an uncle. R.C. was 11 at that time. At age 14, R.C. and her siblings were sent to a foster home. [ 54 ] As noted in the PSR (p8), “R.C. reports that the effects of her attendance at residential school include being away from her parents and extended family, being segregated from her brothers in school, not knowing about birth control, finding it difficult to show affection to her own children, and not knowing how to raise children.

R.C. maintains that by the age of 22, she had two children of her own plus three stepchildren all under the age of 10, and no parenting skills. [ 55 ] As R.C. got older she became the first female Chief of her community and the first female Chief on the [omitted for publication]. She remained Chief of the [omitted for publication] for a four-year term. [ 56 ] G.H.C. recalls his mother struggling with alcohol and depression for many years, and is proud of her being the first female Chief on the [omitted for publication] and helping bring self-governance to her people.

G.H.C. and his mother remain close. [ 57 ] G.H.C. claims that he was introduced to drugs by an older sibling at an early age, while attending elementary school and kept this information from his mother. G.H.C. recalls that school ‘was always good” and that he was active playing minor hockey in Merritt. His father worked at local ranches. He recalls a significant amount of alcohol use accompanied his father’s cowboy lifestyle, and has memories of his parents drinking in the home, which usually included his father’s cowboy buddies. [ 58 ] G.H.C.’s parents separated when he was around eight.

His father remained in the Merritt area and his mother moved to Vancouver, where she enrolled into university. [ 59 ] R.C. recalls the separation affected G.H.C. but they got through it together. She also states that as a single mother, she did her best to ensure that G.H.C. and his brother C.C. were always active and registered him in hockey, baseball and soccer to keep them busy and off the streets. She recounts that G.H.C. struggled with the passing of his older siblings G.C. and C.C. G.H.C. recounts that C.C. was an older brother but also played a major role as caretaker.

G.C. was like a twin to G.H.C. as they were a year apart. [ 60 ] Generally speaking, the Gladue factors that have impacted all indigenous people to varying degrees include: • intergenerational impacts of colonialism and displacement; • loss of autonomy via the Indian act and other attacks on self-determination; • racism and systemic discrimination against indigenous peoples; • legacy of gender discrimination Indian act and related policies;

• physical and sexual abuse at government institutions; • loss of parenting skills and family composition; • normalization of violence; • substance abuse, addiction, and mental health issues; • lack of opportunity and isolation in communities; • political, social and economic segregation from the mainstream; • high rates of unemployment and poverty; low levels of educational attainment; • loneliness, abandonment and dislocation from culture, community and family; • forced attendance at Indian residential schools; • the overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in child welfare and criminal justice systems.

G.H.C.’s Attitude towards the Offences [61] Counsel for the Crown points out that G.H.C.’s account of the offences varies between what he states in the Gladue Report andwhat can be seen in the video evidence of the same event. Specifically, when describing the shooting, G.H.C. states: …We were just driving, just holding speed and then the cop started gaining on behind, that’s when they spike belted us. We made it to[omitted for publication] place and that’s where the cops were trying to force us off the road. I absolutely had never been over a spikebelt before; I was amazed that we kept going.

The cop was trying to stop us and push us off the road, its all slough and stuff down there. Iwas afraid for us, that’s when I fired on him. I was trying to get him to back off man, back off, we’re in danger here now. I got pastNicola Ranch and I pulled off, I told my kid to go to the fence line and that’s when they opened up on me. Now I realized I’m screwed; Igrabbed the gun again and started firing back. Then everything just stopped. [62] I note from the video evidence entered as an exhibit, Cst. Davey is seen pulling up to G.H.C.’s location, then G.H.C. startsshooting.

At no time did the police shoot at G.H.C. at or near the Nicola Ranch. Sentencing Principles Purposes, Objectives, and Principles of Sentencing [63] I now turn to the purposes, objectives, and principles of sentencing and the applicable analytical considerations to determine a fitsentence for this particular Offender. [64] Sentencing is an individualized process which requires the court to take into account both the circumstances of the offence andthe specific circumstances of the offender (see R. v. Shoker, 2006 SCC 44 , 2006 S.C.C. 44, at paragraph 14, and R. v.

Angelillo,2006 SCC 55 , 2006 S.C.C. 55, at paragraph 22). [65] As the sentencing judge, I must direct myself to consider all the principles of sentencing contained in the Code, but also bemindful, depending on the nature of the offence committed that certain principles will receive more emphasis than others (see R. v.McCormick, 2006 ABCA 410 , 2006 A.B.C.A. 410, at paragraphs 9 to 12). Applicable Sentencing Provisions of the Criminal Code [66] The purposes and the principles of sentencing are found in s. 718 to 718.2 of the Code.

These sections codify and plainly statethe intention and rationale for imposing particular sentences, as well as the common law principles of sentencing: R. v. Nasogaluak,2010 SCC 6 at paragraph 39. Fundamental Purpose [67]

Section 718 of the Code outlines the fundamental purpose of sentencing as: 718 The fundamental purpose of sentencing is to protect society and to contribute, along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect forthe law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing just sanctions that have one or more of the followingobjectives: (

a) to denounce unlawful conduct and the harm done to victims or to the community that is caused by 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 to the community; and (

f) to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgment of the harm done to victims or to the community.

Proportionality Principle [68]

Section 718.1 sets out and codifies a fundamental principle of sentencing. It directs that a sentence must be proportionate to thegravity of the offence and the degree of the offender's responsibility. [69] The gravity of the offence refers to what the offender did wrong. It includes two components:

a) the harm or likely harm to the victim; and

b) the harm or likely harm to society and its values (see: R. v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64 , 2015 S.C.C. 64 , at para. 130) [70] The Supreme Court of Canada has held that the proportionality as articulated in s. 718.1 is a fundamental principle of sentencing- "'the sine qua non of a just sanction'. It is grounded in elemental notions of justice and fairness, and is indispensable to the publicconfidence in the justice system." (See R. v. Safarzadeh-Markhali, 2016 SCC 14 , 2016 S.C.C. 14 , para. 70.) Other Applicable Sentencing Principles [71]

Section 718.2, sets out other principle sentencing principles the court must consider. The relevant provisions are: (

a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offenceor the offender, and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, (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, (iii.1) evidence that the offence had a significant impact on the victim, considering their age and other personal circumstances, includingtheir health and financial situation, . . . 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 long or harsh; (

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 and consistent with the harm done tovictims or to the community should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginaloffenders. Parity Principle [72]

Section 718.2(

b) codifies the parity principle, which holds sentences should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offendersfor similar offences in similar circumstances. In R. v. Ipeelee, 2012 SCC 13 , 2012 S.C.C. 13, the Supreme Court held the"parity principle . . . means that any disparity between sanctions for different offenders needs to be justified." Totality Principle [73] The totality principle requires a sentencing Judge who orders an offender to serve consecutive sentences for multiple offences toensure that the cumulative sentence does not exceed the overall culpability of the offender.

R. v M.(C.A.) (SCC), [1996]1 S.C.R. 500. Crown Position [74] Crown seeks a global sentence of 10 years and set out as follows: 1) On Information 36678, Count 1 - three years jail, which is the mandatory minimum agreed to by Fort St. John Crown on waiverto Kamloops. 2) On Information 111164, Count 1 – 12 months; Count 2 – 12 months; Count 3 - four years; Count 4 – two and a half years; andCount 5 – seven years, to be concurrent to each other but consecutive to Count 1 on Information 36678.

Ancillary orders [75] Crown seeks the following ancillary orders: 1) s. 109 firearms prohibition for 10 years; 2) Forfeiture order as per s. 491 of the Criminal Code; and 3) Compulsory DNA Order related to the criminal negligence offence.

Defence Position [76] Counsel for G.H.C. submits that an appropriate sentence is an eight year global sentence; which counsel breaks down as follows: 1) On Information 36678, Count 1 - three years. 2) On Information 111164 – five years. Mitigation [77] G.H.C. is before the court entering guilty pleas and taking responsibility without the need for the Crown, Defence, court, police,and civilians to engage in a trial. As I understand, G.H.C. indicated his intention to take responsibility early on. Aggravating Factors [78] There are a number of aggravating factors. a.

G.H.C. brought his 11 year old son, A.C., with him from Fort St. John to Merritt in a stolen truck and trailer, then engaged in a shootout with police in Merritt while A.C. was in the passenger seat, which resulted in A.C. being shot. In doing so, G.H.C. abused a positionof trust in relation to A.C. per

section 718.2(a)(iii). b. A.C. suffered significant injuries as a result of an extremely traumatic event per

section 718.2(a)(iii.1). c. G.H.C. was released on bail with conditions at the time of the offence. d. G.H.C. had a loaded automatic weapon in the truck while his son was a passenger and discharged the firearm at police on twooccasions, at separate locations over a short period of time. e. G.H.C. drove through a spike belt then continued to drive the pickup over a significant distance, essentially on the rims. f. G.H.C. fired an automatic weapon on Hwy 8 within the indigenous community of [omitted for publication], with residences nearby. g.

G.H.C. was high on meth at the time of the offence, with his son in the vehicle. Case Law Firearms Trafficking [79] Three years is the mandatory minimum for this offence. This is the position of Crown in Fort St. John. I will note that bothCrown and Defense are ad idem on this point. From the cases cited by counsel – R. v. Radjenovic, [2012] B.C.J. No. 854 (B.C.S.C.); R.v. Boesel, [2017] B.C.J. No. 1111 (B.C.S.C.); and R. v. Stover, [2018] B.C.J.

No. 2947 (B.C.P.C.), the range of sentence is three to eightyears. [80] From the circumstances before me, it seems G.H.C. could easily be looking at a five year sentence given the number and natureof the guns he trafficked in. Possess Prohibited Weapon [81] The mandatory three year minimum for this offence has been struck down in R. v. Nur, 2015 SCC 15 , 2015 S.C.C. 15. [82] In R. v. Kachuol, [2017] B.C.J. No. 1591 (B.C.C.A.), the Crown appealed the sentence, which after a trail, was a conditionalsentence order of two years less a day.

The Court of appeal allowed the crown appeal and imposed a three year jail sentence. Theoffender in Kachuol was found with a loaded handgun between the driver’s seat and centre console of his vehicle. Dickson J. A. foundKachuol’s offending fell on the “truly criminal” end of the possession spectrum (at para 27) and at para 28 states: There was nothing in the evidence to indicate that Mr. Kachuol's possession of the loaded, prohibited "crime gun" was for anything otherthan a criminal purpose. Nor did he even suggest it.

There was simply no possible benign reason for his unlawful possession of theloaded gun apparent on the evidence. In such circumstances, proof of a direct connection with other criminal activity was unnecessary tosituate the offence at the "true crime" end of the s. 95(1) spectrum. In my view, requiring such proof would tend to defeat the purpose ofthe provision. [83] From the facts before me, I find that G.H.C. did use the prohibited firearm for a criminal purpose.

He fired at police on twooccasions with an automatic and prohibited weapon, while high on meth and in possession of a stolen vehicle with a plan to sell both thetruck and weapon for profit. The firearm was modified to operate fully automatically and was loaded with a magazine holding 21 roundsof ammunition. [84] I also find that the circumstances before me are more egregious than Kachoul. Discharging a Firearm [85] In R. v. Ali, [2015] B.C.J. No 2955 (B.C.S.C.), the accused was sentenced to 8.5 years for discharging a firearm.

The court foundthat the accused fired eight shots at a motor vehicle where the driver was struck causing significant injury. The accused was 23 at thetime of the offence and 30 at the time of sentence and had no criminal record. In sentencing Mr. Ali, Holmes J (as he then was) referredto R. v. Zhu, 2013 BCCA 416 , 2013 B.C.C.A. 416 (at para 82):

82 The courts of this province have made clear that the illegal possession and use of firearms is a harm that our society cannot tolerate: From R. v. Zhu, 2013 BCCA 416 at para. 21: [21] Firearms are a scourge in our society. The possession and use of firearms poses unacceptable risks to the public and the police.There is no doubt that both must be protected from the illegal possession and risk of use of unlawful firearms. The importance attached tothis imperative was emphasized by Madam Justice D. Smith in R. v. Guha, 2012 BCCA 423, particularly at paras. 28-30.

She said atpara. 30: In short, firearms, and in particular handguns, are extremely dangerous when possessed for an illicit purpose. That purpose can only be tothreaten or inflict serious bodily harm or death. Sentences for these types of offences must reflect society's absolute rejection of suchunacceptable conduct. From R. v. Sanghera, 2012 BCSC 901 at paras. 28-30 (affirmed 2012 BCCA 459): [28] These offences cut at the very fabric of society. As Canadians, we abhor weapons of self-help, and instead commit our support togovernment according to democratic principles and the rule of law.

These offences are not acts of terrorism, but they strike at thecommunity in the same way. They threaten not only the individuals who might have been targets or innocent bystanders, but also themuch broader community whose members should be able to live free of fear that their neighbours on the streets of Vancouver arecovertly in possession of loaded semi-automatic pistols. [29] It would be impossible not to have noticed the recent increase in crimes involving firearms which have evidently seeped into thecommunity for use within society's insidious criminal underbelly.

Our social institutions -- police, hospitals, courts -- have had to call outscarce resources to address the escalating costs of these crimes. Criminal sentences provide one means by which society can denouncethis type of conduct and attempt to deter it. [30] These offences therefore call for sentences that send a very strong message of denunciation and condemnation, and that aresufficiently severe to deter other people from similar conduct.

General deterrence is a particularly valuable sentencing objective inrelation to offences of this nature, which are typically planned and committed with an eye to the potential risks of detection andprosecution. [86] In R. v. Utye, 2013 NUCJ 14 , [2013] Nu.J. No. 18 (N.U.C.J.), the offender was 21, who in an intoxicated and angrystate, fired his gun towards the local RCMP detachment. No one was injured. Aggravating factors included Mr. Utye’s knowledge thathe was shooting at police (which I note is similar to G.H.C.).

There was an element of planning and was not a spur of the momentdecision (G.H.C. shot at police then drove a significant distance and shot at police again). Mr. Utye had a vantage point and was heavilyintoxicated at time of the offence. In sentencing Mr. Utye to seven years, J. Kilpatrick referred to R. v. Kolola, 2010 NUCJ 4 andspecifically, at para. 28 of Utye: [28] The peace officer is charged with the responsibility to preserve and protect the peace and to enforce the law on behalf of others inthe community.

In symbolic terms, an attack upon a peace officer is an assault upon the community for which they serve. It is anassault upon the rule of law. Those who take on the peace officer, those who challenge their authority, also challenge the law uponwhich this authority is based. Deliberate attacks upon police officers thus merit a severe response from the law and from the courts thatadminister this law. Denunciation and deterrence must be the foremost consideration of any court called upon to sentence individualsconvicted of such attacks… [87] In R v. Sellars, [2021] B.C.J.

No. 2135, Provincial Court Judge Leven sentenced a 33 year old Indigenous offender withsignificant Gladue factors and who fell on the FASD spectrum and diagnosed with mild neurocognitive disorder. Mr. Sellars wassentenced to a number of offences, including an offence under

section 244 of the Criminal Code. Mr. Sellars had broken into a residencein Merritt, removed firearms then fled from police and at one point pointed a shotgun outside the driver’s side window and shot at one ofthe officers. He then continued to flee driving over a spike belt, at which time, Mr. Sellars fired more shots at police. Eventually, Mr.Sellars’ vehicle became immobile, and he was arrested and placed in custody.

In sentencing, PCJ Leven, referred to the decision of R. v.McArthur, (O.N.C.A.) para 49: [49] As indicated above, the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society is the fundamental purpose of sentencing. Police officersplay a unique and crucial role in promoting and preserving a just, peaceful and safe society. We rely on the police to put themselves inharm's way to protect the community from the criminal element. At the same time, we rely on the police to act with restraint in theexecution of their duties and to avoid the use of any force, much less deadly force, unless clearly necessary.

Violent attacks upon policeofficers who are doing their duty are attacks on the rule of law and on the safety and well-being of the community as a whole.

Sentencesimposed for those attacks must reflect the vulnerability of the police officers, society's dependence on the police, and society'sdetermination to avoid a policing mentality which invites easy resort to violence in the execution of the policing function: R. v.Forrest (1986), 15 O.A.C. 104 at 107 (C.A.). [88] In passing sentence, Provincial Court Judge Leven in Sellars states at para 61-62: 61 The most serious of the offences, discharging a firearm with intent while targeting police officers, requires a sentence whichemphasizes denunciation and deterrence. This remains the case despite Mr.

Sellars' mental-health difficulties and Gladue factors. But forthose factors, the sentence I am about to impose would have been even higher. 62 Mr. Sellars has a serious criminal record which displays a pattern of offences involving violence and firearms. These types ofoffences and their repetitive nature requires a sentence which separates Mr. Sellars from society for the protection of the public. [89] I will note the difference between Mr. Sellars and G.H.C. is the fact that Mr.

Sellars appeared before the court with a serious andrelated criminal record, whereas G.H.C.’s criminal record is dated and with the exception of an ACBH in 2003 is non-violent.

[ 90 ] Case law and legislation make it clear that denunciation and deterrence are paramount considerations in cases like this, where an offender engages in a shootout with police on a public highway or in the midst of an indigenous community, public safety is also a key factor. [ 91 ] I find it extremely aggravating that G.H.C. shot at police on two occasions as he fled on a motor vehicle with his 11 year old son in the passenger seat resulting in gun shots wounds to the offender and his son. It is nothing short of amazing that no one else was injured.

While no police officers tendered individual victim impact statements, the letter from the Merritt RCMP detachment speaks volumes to the effect and impact on the police officers who find themselves in the positon of being shot at and having to return fire in public. These officers are human beings with family, friends, hopes and dreams and have sacrificed greatly to protect the public, including G.H.C. [ 92 ] G.H.C. is a father as well. In reading the PSR and Gladue Reports, it seems that G.H.C.’s decision to shoot at and flee police was out of concern for his son.

It is difficult to accept this notion in the circumstances. [ 93 ] G.H.C. was high on meth, driving a stolen truck and trailer from Fort St. John, with a prohibited and loaded weapon, to the Lower Mainland for profit and took his 11 year old son along for the ride. [ 94 ] Just prior, G.H.C. engaged in the purchase and sale of restricted and prohibited firearms for profit.

There are at least 11, possibly 13 restricted and prohibited handguns out there, circulating in public and in potentially in the hands of criminals. [ 95 ] In the circumstances, it is understandable why the Crown seeks a 10 year jail sentence for G.H.C. [ 96 ] At the same time, it is understandable why counsel for G.H.C. urges this court to consider an eight year sentence based on G.H.C.’s decision to take responsibility for his actions; the rehabilitative steps he has taken while in custody; and the significant Gladue factors present in G.H.C.’s life. [ 97 ] I will also note from the circumstances, that the Crown in its sentencing submissions relied to a certain extent on the position that G.H.C. shot out a police officer’s windshield during the shoot-out.

Counsel for G.H.C. took issue with this as it appeared from the circumstances, the police officer shot out his own windshield as he fired at G.H.C. In regards to the shoot-out in general, Counsel for G.H.C. states further that G.H.C. is very familiar with firearms as he was a hunting guide for many years, and that if G.H.C. wanted to shoot directly at police, there would be very clear evidence of that. From the circumstances, no police vehicles nor officers were struck by bullets fired by G.H.C. This of course is all after the fact analysis.

For police officers and anyone nearby, the police were taking on gunfire and returned gunfire. The photo evidence entered as an exhibit in these proceedings, show that the rear of the pickup truck driven by G.H.C. had multiple bullet holes on the driver’s side cab and door, with five clearly visible bullet holes in the large fuel tank on the back of the flat bed. [ 98 ] Fortunately, as apparent from the photos, the large fuel tank was empty. [ 99 ] G.H.C.’s actions on that day can only be described as reckless, defiant and negligent. It is a miracle that G.H.C. and his son survived.

It is also a miracle that no officer or member of the public was injured, given the number of shots fired. [ 100 ] There is no place for this behaviour in a just and democratic society guided by the rule of law and the protection of its citizens. This behaviour must be denounced and offenders who commit these types of crimes deterred. The only appropriate way to do this in these circumstances is to impose a sentence that upholds these values and condemns the actions of those who choose to engage in criminal behaviour involving restricted and prohibited firearms for personal gain.

Criminal Negligence Causing Bodily Harm [ 101 ] G.H.C.’s account of the shoot-out where he and A.C. were struck by bullets is set out in the Gladue Report at page 15, where G.H.C. states: ….I knew I was done. I actually surrendered, my hands in the air, at that point they shot me, they’re still firing at us. I get back in front of the vehicle, A.C. tried to walk away and that’s when he got grazed. A bullet went through the hood of the truck and grazed A.C. I told A.C. to get down by the truck, but A.C. can’t stop looking at me shot in the back That’s it, its done, its over.

I did the whole surrender thing; I didn’t want A.C. to go through any more process. [ 102 ] I note from the video played back of this particular moment, G.H.C.’s vehicle comes to a stop on Hwy 8, he gets out and starts shooting his automatic weapon, then RCMP return fire. Eventually, G.H.C. surrenders. [ 103 ] A.C. suffered three bullet wounds in G.H.C.’s shootout with police. His father, G.H.C., while under the influence of meth fired at police on two occasions with an automatic rifle as his 11 year old son sat in the passenger seat.

One can only imagine the shock and fear this child faced as his father shot at police, drove thru a spike belt then continued to ride the truck on its rims until it can go no further then engage in a shootout. In submissions, Crown notes an inability to find a case with similar circumstances, which from the courts perspective is a good thing. [ 104 ] In R v B.O.J.T. , [2006] B.C.J. No. 1298 (BCPC) , a three and a half year jail sentence was levied against a 21 year old offender who had shaken his infant child causing severe injuries.

The child faced a lifetime of care with significant cognitive impairment and was not expected to live beyond his teen years. The court noted a range of sentence from provincial time (including a conditional sentence order) to federal time. Provincial Court Judge N. Phillips noted that case law gave primary consideration to denunciation and deterrence with rehabilitation given less weight. [ 105 ] In R. v. Babcock, [2013] B.C.J.

No. 2069 (B.C.C.A.) , an 53 year old offender with chronic health issues and an addiction to cocaine, received a two and a half year jail sentence for shooting his roommate in the leg with a sawed off shotgun. The court accepted the offenders claim that he did not intend to shoot his roommate and that he did so in a paranoid drug induced state. In passing sentence,

the court noted that the offender possessed a prohibited weapon while high on drugs showed wanton and reckless disregard for the safety of the victim in that case. [ 106 ] The Criminal Code at

section 718.01 requires a court imposing a sentence for an offence that involves abuse of a person under the age of eighteen years, to give primary consideration to the objectives of denunciation and deterrence. [ 107 ] I accept Crown’s submission that what happened to A.C. was nothing short of abuse by G.H.C. He placed his son directly in harm’s way by driving in a stolen vehicle, high on meth and engaging in a shootout with police while A.C. sat in the passenger seat of the vehicle.

G.H.C. did not fire the bullet however he was the direct and only reason A.C. suffered the physical and mental trauma he did. [ 108 ] I find that G.H.C. possessed a prohibited weapon for a criminal purpose, was high on drugs and demonstrated wanton, reckless and negligent disregard for the safety of this son, A.C. [ 109 ] G.H.C. has been in custody since the offence date, some 521 days, which with credit amounts to 782 days. [ 110 ] The sentence that I would have imposed is a 10 year global sentence, however for reasons of totality, the significant Gladue factors in G.H.C.’s life, the rehabilitative steps G.H.C. has taken while in custody and his relatively early guilty plea saving the Crown, RCMP and the victim to go through the hardship of a trial, I am reducing his sentence to a global sentence of nine years minus the 782 days credit he has earned.

Accordingly, the sentence that I impose is as follows: 1) On Information 36678-1, Count 1, trafficking in firearms, three years. 2) On Information 111164-1: Count 1, possession of stolen property over $5,000, 12 months; Count 2, possession of stolen property over $5,000, 12 months; Count 3, possession of a prohibited firearm, four years; Count 4, criminal negligence causing bodily harm, two and a half years; Count 5, discharge of firearm with intent to wound, maim or disfigure, or to endanger the life of the five named police officers, six years. [ 111 ] The sentences in 111164 are concurrent to each other as all offences arise out of the same circumstances but consecutive to the sentence in 36678-1. [ 112 ] Pursuant to

section 109 of the Criminal Code , G.H.C. is prohibited from possessing a firearm for 10 years. [ 113 ] Pursuant to

section 491 of the Code , all items seized are hereby forfeited to the Crown, with the exception of any cash, which will be returned to G.H.C. [ 114 ] Count 4 on Information 111164 is a primary designated offence. Pursuant to s. 487.051(1) of the Criminal Code , I authorize the taking of sample of bodily substances from you. The samples will be taken from you while you are in custody and you must submit to the taking the samples. ______________________________ The Honourable Judge R.D. Phillips Provincial Court of British Columbia