R. v. Queyras, 2020 BCPC 40

Citation: R. v. Queyras 2020 BCPC 40 Date: 20200312 File No: 67179-2 Registry: North Vancouver IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Criminal Court REGINA v. ALBAN PIERRE MARIE QUEYRAS DECISION OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE P. BOND Counsel for the Crown: A. Lee Counsel for the Defendant: N. Leggett Place of Hearing: North Vancouver , B.C. Dates of Hearing: March 5 and 6, 2020 Date of Judgment: March 12, 2020 INTRODUCTION:

[ 1 ] Mr. Alban Queyras has plead guilty to one count of driving without due care and attention under information 67179 on August 11, 2019. [ 2 ] The circumstances of the offence are as follows: [ 3 ] Mr. Queyras is a French National who was on holidays in the Vancouver area at the time. He had arrived in Vancouver on July, 2019. On Aug 9 th the family and their friends, Ms. Balzan and her daughter went up to Whistler in a rented Dodge Caravan. Mr. Queyras’ family included his wife, an 11 year old son and twins of just about 18 months of age. [ 4 ] On their return trip to West Vancouver, Mr.

Queyras was driving southbound on Horseshoe Bay Drive in West Vancouver, having exited the Highway. He crossed the center line and after clipping the rear corner of a Ford F150, hit a Yaris head on. Tragically, 29-year-old Sage Massey was driving that vehicle and she was killed in the collision. CIRCUMSTANCES OF ACCUSED: [ 5 ] Mr. Queyras and his wife are both social workers in France with a young family. Mr. Queyras has no criminal or driving record and there is no suggestion that alcohol or drugs were factors in the accident.

He does not suffer from any addictions or afflictions that would be relevant to this hearing. [ 6 ] There is evidence before the court that his driving was entirely appropriate up to a mere moment before the accident. Nonetheless, Mr. Queyras admitted to the police in a warned statement soon after the accident that he knew he was tired, as he had only 2 hours sleep 2 nights before the accident and only 6 hours sleep on the night before the accident, because the twins were not sleeping well in Whistler. He purchased a coffee to assist him in staying alert. He was well aware of the terrain he was driving in.

He considered stopping but chose to carry on, as there were only 27 kilometres left in the trip. [ 7 ] Mr. Queyras openly acknowledged immediately after the accident that he believed he had fallen asleep. VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENTS : [ 8 ] I have the very eloquent and heartbreaking account by Ms. Massey’s mother, of the measure of her loss. Her description of Sage Massey is of a healthy, happy, engaging young woman who embraced her life fully and had a vocation she loved. She was adored by her clients and their families and of course by her own family members. Ms.

Clark closes the statement saying that she is forever broken, and after reading her description of her daughter, one can well understand why and how profound the loss is to her and to society. SUBMISSIONS OF CROWN: [ 9 ] In this case I have the joint submission of Crown and defense that the appropriate penalty is a fine ranging from $1,500 to $2,000. They are not seeking a driving prohibition, as it would be meaningless, given that Mr. Queyras lives in France.

SENTENCING OBJECTIVES : [ 10 ] In each case, “a sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender,” [ 11 ] The court must impose similar sentences for similar offences committed in similar circumstances. [ 12 ] The law requires a sentencing judge to balance a variety of factors in arriving at a fit sentence for each offender.

Without this requirement, it would be relatively simple to impose a sentence based solely on the effect on the victims to the offence divorced from all other considerations. [ 13 ] Factors in mitigation: - early acknowledgement of culpability - early guilty plea - remorse - No risk to the community - single offence; no criminal or driving record - cooperation with the authorities [ 14 ] Factors in aggravation: - severe consequences of the offence. SENTENCE: [ 15 ] Decisions about what charges can and should be laid in the wake of a serious incident of this kind are made by very experienced Crown counsel.

They must consider a wide variety of factors in making those decisions, including the possibility of proceeding with more serious charges. In this case that decision was rejected after the evidence and prospect of conviction were analyzed. [ 16 ] The Crown chose to proceed in this matter pursuant to s 144(1)(

a) of the Motor Vehicle Act which makes it an offence to drive

without due care and attention. That is something different from a criminal offence under the Criminal Code . [ 17 ] Mr. Queyras’ error was in the nature of negligence. He is being held accountable not for criminal conduct but for being negligent by failing to exercise the care and attention that was due of him on the date and in the circumstances in question. This is so, even though the consequences of his failure to exercise due care and attention were so dreadfully tragic. [ 18 ] Mr.

Queyras is not being sentenced for causing Sage Massey’s death; he is being sentenced for driving without due care and attention – an offence that carries less moral blameworthiness than, for example, the Criminal Code offence of criminal negligence causing death. [ 19 ] I must also have regard to the magnitude of the loss to the family of Sage Massey. While I can only begin to appreciate that loss, and the fact that her mother and other family members are living with it each and every day, I agree with the comments of many of the judges that have sat on too many such cases before this.

As stated by the late Judge Stansfield, our former Chief Justice in R. v. Cameron , 2004 BCPC 500 : There are some kinds of tragedies to which courts are ill equipped to respond. There is nothing that I can do in this room today that will in any way be proportionate to the loss experienced by the family. There is nothing I can do that will be experienced by (the accused) as a burden anywhere near as great as that with which (he) already lives, in the simple knowledge of the results of this terrible accident. In Judge Woods said at para. 26 of R. V.

Chisolm , 2009 BCPC 23 : There is no equation to be drawn between the quantum of the fine imposed … for driving without due care and attention and the magnitude of the loss suffered by the victims of this tragedy. And as Judge Bowden expressed in R. v. Ida , 2008 BCPC 108 : …No matter what the sentence is under the Motor Vehicle Act, it can do nothing to bring back the victim of this tragedy, nor should it be taken in any way as putting any particular value on human life. That is impossible.

So, any sentence of the court, particularly where a fine is involved, should never be taken to have any meaning in terms of the value of human life, which, as everybody would agree is priceless. [ 20 ] I agree with Mr. Leggett that this case does not fall within the range of cases requiring the maximum penalty in terms of the fine available. However, I have also given consideration to the fact that Mr. Queyras was aware that he was tired and elected to drive in any event, rather than rest before proceeding.

Having considered the careful balancing required by the principles of sentencing, taking into account the seriousness of the offence, the degree of responsibility of the offender, and the terribly tragic consequences, I am of the view that the appropriate fine should be $1,800. There will be a Victim Fine Surcharge of 15%. Mr. Queyras will have 30 days to pay the fine and surcharge. ___________________________ The Honourable Judge P. Bond Provincial Court of British Columbia