R. v. McNeil, 2018 BCPC 172

Citation: R. v. McNeil 2018 BCPC 172 Date: 20180201 File Nos: 202153-6B, 220790-2A, 220790-3C Registry: Surrey File Nos: 97739-1, 97739-2A, 98120-1, 98794-1 Registry: Port Coquitlam IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Criminal Court REGINA v. JUANITA CHARMAINE MCNEIL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE P. STARK Counsel for the Crown: N. Fowlds Counsel for the Defendant: K. Cronin Place of Hearing: Surrey , B.C. Date of Hearing: January 4, 2018; February 1, 2018 Date of Judgment: February 1, 2018 [ 1 ] Before me is Juanita McNeil and on November 3rd, 2017 she entered guilty pleas to the following Informations and the

following counts. [ 2 ] Court File 202153 from Port Coquitlam, Count 1, May 17th, 2016, breach of probation by failing to report, contrary to s. 733.1(1). The order was imposed on August 8th, 2014. [ 3 ] Court File 98120 from Port Moody, she pled guilty to Count 2, 3 and 4. They are all from the 13th of June, 2016. Count 2 is that she did fraudulently personate Lori Miller, with the intent to obtain insurance, contrary to s. 403(1) (

b) of the Criminal Code ; Count 3, possession of stolen property, a 1991 Volvo 940, the property of Lori Miller, contrary to s. 355(b); and Count 4, possession of methamphetamine, contrary to s. 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act . [ 4 ] Court File Number 97739, Port Coquitlam, Counts 2 and 3 are from the 1st of November, 2016. Count 2 is that she did fraudulently personate Katrina James, with the intent to gain advantage, pursuant to s. 403(1) (

a) of the Criminal Code ; and Count 3, possession of identification documents without lawful excuse that relate to another person contrary to s. 56.1(1). [ 5 ] Court File Number 220790-C3 is from Surrey. She pled guilty to four counts on that Information from the 11th of January, 2017.

Count 3, that you did possess forged documents, contrary to s. 368(1)(d); Count 4, possession of instruments or materials that were intended for use to commit forgery, contrary to s. 368.1; Count 6, possession of credit cards, or forged or falsified credit cards, the property of persons unknown, knowing that they were obtained by the commission of an offence, contrary to s. 342(1)(c); and Count 7, possession of mail contrary to s. 356(1)(b). [ 6 ] Court File 220790-A2 from Surrey, Ms.

McNeil pled guilty to Count 1, that on the 22nd of March, 2017, that she breached her undertaking in relation to her curfew condition, contrary to s. 145(3). [ 7 ] Court File 98794 in Burnaby, Ms. McNeil pled guilty to four counts on that Information, all from the 27th of September, 2017.

Count 1, possession of a credit card, a forged credit card, property of Victoria Vitek, knowing it was obtained by the commission of an offence, contrary to 342(1)(c); Count 2, possession of a credit card, or forged credit card, property of Joanna Kim, knowing it was obtained by the commission of an offence, contrary to s. 342(1)(c); Count 3, possession of stolen property, a cheque, the property of Yuen Ling Carol Au, contrary to s. 355(b); and Count 4, possession without lawful excuse of identification documents of another person, contrary to s. 56.1(1). [ 8 ] And finally, Court File Number 97739-A2 from Burnaby.

Again, these are both from the 27th of September, 2017. Count 1 is breach of a recognizance, the condition being a curfew condition; and Count 2, breach of a recognizance condition not to possess identification documents that are not in your own name. [ 9 ] Ms.

NcNeil has pled guilty to a series of offences involving possession of identification documents not in her own name, possession of fraudulent identification documents, possession of instruments and materials suitable for creating false documents, personation and possession of stolen property, between May 2016 and September of 2017. [ 10 ] The offences involve a high level of sophistication and organization, cover a protracted period of time and have affected a large number of people within many communities. [ 11 ] Ms.

McNeil also pled guilty to breaching conditions of probation and bail. [ 12 ] The Crown submitted that in sentencing Ms. McNeil for each event, the fit and appropriate sentences served consecutively would total eight years. They further submitted that in considering the totality principle, that eight years would be unduly harsh for this offender and for these offences and that a global sentence of three to four years would adequately address Ms. McNeil's moral culpability. [ 13 ] Ms. McNeil's counsel submitted that a more appropriate range would be two years. [ 14 ] Both counsel acknowledge that Ms.

McNeil spent most of 2017 in custody and that the time she has served pre-sentencing -- and I want to make sure I have got this correct, now that we have had to adjourn the sentencing. So, I believe that the time she has served pre-sentencing is 275 -- or actually I think it is 273 days which I credit at 410 days, but I do not know if that is -- is that in accordance with counsel's calculation? Well, Ms. Cronin, we are at 245 days and I believe there has been an additional 28 days, if I am not mistaken. [ 15 ] MS. CRONIN: Yes. We were before Your Honour on January 4th and so 31 minus four, plus one.

So 31 minus three would be 28 days additional. [ 16 ] THE COURT: Twenty-eight days -- [ 17 ] MS. CRONIN: Correct. [ 18 ] THE COURT: -- and so that would come to 273 and then I believe that that credit would be -- come to 410 but I am not -- [ 19 ] MS. FOWLDS: I can double check that, Your Honour. [ 20 ] THE COURT: All right. If you will. [ 21 ] Both counsel submit that this time should be deducted from a sentence imposed. [ 22 ] The matter proceeded before me by way of an Agreed Statement of Facts. I will provide a

summary of the facts as they apply to my decision. [ 23 ] In May 2016, Ms. McNeil was bound by a three-year probation order that had been imposed in August 2014. One of the conditions was that she was to report to a probation officer, that she failed to do so on May 17th, 2016.

[ 24 ] Shortly after that, Ms. McNeil came to the attention of the Port Moody Community Action Team who focused their investigations on people considered prolific offenders. [ 25 ] On June 13th, 2016, the police located a white 1991 Volvo that had been abandoned after a collision with a light pole in Maple Ridge. The police were advised that two people were seen fleeing the vehicle. After conducting a systems check, the police determined that the vehicle was registered to Lori Miller. Ms.

Miller advised that her purse had been stolen in February 2016 and that she did not own the vehicle and that she had been alerted that someone was trying to open credit cards in her name. [ 26 ] In the vehicle was located a large amount of unopened mail in the names of multiple people. A purse containing a B.C. Services Card in Ms. McNeil's name, as well as drug paraphernalia was located. Ms. McNeil's fingerprints were located in the vehicle. Ms. McNeil acknowledged that she personated Ms. Miller in order to insure the vehicle in Ms. Miller's name and that she had had possession of that vehicle. [ 27 ] Ms.

McNeil fled the scene at that point and was not charged with this offence until the 2nd of June, 2017. [ 28 ] On the 1st of November, 2016, Ms. McNeil attended the TD Bank, Canada Trust Bank in Port Coquitlam and attempted to open an account in the name of Katrina Jones. Ms. McNeil presented a number of identification documents in Katrina Jones' name. The bank employee thought that the identification appeared to be fake and called the police. Ms. McNeil left the bank before the police arrived and was not located at the time. She was subsequently identified by the employee in a photo line-up. Ms.

McNeil acknowledged that she impersonated Ms. Jones and was in possession without a lawful excuse of identification documents not in her own name. [ 29 ] Ms. McNeil was not charged with that offence until the 24th of March, 2017. [ 30 ] In December 2016, the Port Moody Police Department conducted surveillance on Ms. McNeil and her co-accused Theodor Trent and determined a location where the two were living together. [ 31 ] On January 11th, 2017, the police arrested both Ms. McNeil and Mr. Trent on outstanding warrants. Ms.

McNeil was searched incidental to arrest and a number of forged identification documents were located. [ 32 ] In addition, the police, pursuant to a search warrant, conducted a search of the location and found instruments and material suitable for creating forged documents including credit card scanners, credit card press, a credit card printer, blank cards, counterfeit identification documents with Ms. McNeil's photo affixed in other people's names and similar documents with Mr.

Trent's photo affixed, 495 pieces of mail addressed to 194 individual addresses and a large quantity of identification documents not in the name of either Ms. McNeil or Mr. Trent were located in the basement suite. The items were seized. [ 33 ] Ms. McNeil and Mr. Trent were not charged at that time with offences relating to the January 11th, 2017 event and they were both released from custody. [ 34 ] The police determined that Ms. McNeil and Mr. Trent gave false names to the landlord when they rented the basement suite. Ms. McNeil and Mr.

Trent returned to the basement suite and on the 27th of January, 2017, they were arrested for the January 11th, 2017 offences. [ 35 ] The police conducted a subsequent search of the residence pursuant to a search warrant and located printers, two boxes of blank ID cards, 2,250 blank cheques and financial statements, credit cards, not in their name. [ 36 ] Forensic analysis determined that personal information for over 100 people was found on computers and electronic devices, and Internet searches relating to the fraudulent creation of documents were located. [ 37 ] Ms.

McNeil remained in custody until March 6th, 2017, at which time she was released on a Recognizance of Bail with strict conditions including house arrest and a residential treatment centre, New Vision, and not to possess ID documents not in her own name. [ 38 ] Ms. McNeil left New Visions four days later on March 10th, 2017 without permission, was arrested on March 22nd, 2017, when police were called about a woman stumbling around on Broadway in Vancouver in the early a.m. hours. [ 39 ] Ms.

McNeil remained in custody until June 29th, 2017, and was then released on strict conditions, including to reside at a specified residential treatment facility. [ 40 ] The bail was varied by consent on July 20th, 2017, to allow Ms. McNeil to live with her mother until a bed at Ellendale Treatment Facility came available. Ms. McNeil did not reside at Ellendale but, rather, remained in her mother's home. [ 41 ] On September 27, 2017, Ms. McNeil was arrested for breaching her curfew. She was under surveillance and the police observed her drive up to her mother's residence without her mother in the car.

It was past her curfew and subsequent to the arrest, the police conducted searches of Ms. McNeil, the vehicle and Ms. McNeil's mother's home, and located a large quantity of forged documents, documents in names other than her own, including a MasterCard in the name of Victoria Vitek, who is the complainant in Count 1 of Information 98794, a MasterCard and driver's licence in the name of Joanna Kim and a cheque in the name of Yeung Ling Carol Lau. The police also located personal identification information for a large number of people other than Ms. McNeil or her mother. Mail not in Ms.

McNeil's name nor her mother's and a package of cheques, material used to print cheques and blank printable cards suitable for creating identification documents were also located. [ 42 ] Ms. McNeil rented the vehicle she was driving in the name of Joanna Kim. Ms. McNeil was a prohibited driver at the time. [ 43 ] Ms. McNeil has been in custody since her arrest on September 27th, 2017. At the time, she was bound by a number of conditions including the curfew and conditions not to possess ID documents not in her own name.

[ 44 ] The court was provided with three Pre-Sentence Reports from December 1999, July 2014 and January 2018. They provide considerable detail about Ms. McNeil and the latter two reports include a Gladue component. [ 45 ] Ms. McNeil is 44 years of age. She has a substantial criminal record that dates back to when she was a young offender in 1990. It includes convictions for Controlled Drugs and Substances Act matters, breaches of court orders, property offences, driving convictions and a recent conviction for robbery.

What is notable is that there is a significant gap on her record between 1999 and 2014, a period of almost 15 years. I will address this gap later in my decision. [ 46 ] The reports disclose that Ms. McNeil is of First Nations heritage and the sentencing principles in s. 718.2(

e) must be applied. [ 47 ] The reports disclose that Ms. McNeil was exposed to horrendous mistreatment both by way of abuse and neglect in her younger years. Ms. McNeil's mother, Veronica Gardener was unable to care for her and Ms. McNeil was in the care of Child Services when she was two. Within the year, her father obtained custody and Ms. McNeil lived with her father and paternal grandmother. [ 48 ] Within that home, Ms. McNeil was exposed to both physical and sexual abuse at the hands of various males, both relatives and non-relatives, living in the home. This form of abuse stopped when Ms.

McNeil was 11 or 12 years of age. Ms. Gardener confirmed the validity of Ms. McNeil's reports of abuse. Ms. Gardener also advised that she, as well, was subjected to similar mistreatment as a child. [ 49 ] Ms. McNeil started using marihuana at the age of 13 and quickly progressed to IV cocaine use at the age of 15. She has struggled since with a profound addiction to various substances. During her years of successful sobriety, when she was raising her children, she went on methadone and remained clean for approximately eight years or more.

She, unfortunately, relapsed on crystal methamphetamine in 2013 and has been struggling with that addiction since. It is viewed that that addiction, in large part, has contributed to her offending behaviour. [ 50 ] Ms. McNeil has tried a few recovery programs over the years but has not engaged in the treatment in any meaningful way. She is willing to go to outpatient programming and counselling but is not willing to go to any long-term residential treatment program. [ 51 ] The reports reflect that Ms.

McNeil's mother has been successful in maintaining her own sobriety for approximately 30 years and is a strong support for Ms. McNeil. [ 52 ] The other community support for Ms. McNeil is her ex-boyfriend, Jason Donald. Mr. Donald had been a drug addict as well during the early part of his relationship with Ms. McNeil, but he overcame his addiction many years ago. The couple have two children together, ages 14 and 16. Ms. McNeil maintained her sobriety for the first eight years of the children's lives and then, unfortunately, relapsed. [ 53 ] Following her relapse and the subsequent reoffending behaviour, Mr.

Donald became the primary caregiver and lives with the children in Squamish. He is supportive of Ms. McNeil and her involvement with the children as long as she has not been using drugs when she sees them. [ 54 ] Ms. McNeil left school in Grade 8 but, to her credit, she has been taking upgrading courses while in custody, is very close to completing her Dogwood Diploma. She has a very limited work history and has supported herself by collecting disability payments and, in more recent years, with unfortunate criminal activity.

She also completed numerous life skill programs while in custody. [ 55 ] Both the author of the most recent report and Ms. McNeil's counsel submitted that Ms. McNeil had viewed her offending behaviour as victimless and that she had not turned her mind to the actual impact it had on many people. She is described as starting to realize that her actions have affected many people and she has expressed remorse for her actions. [ 56 ] Ms.

McNeil has maintained sobriety while in custody and this has contributed to her ability to more fully grasp the significance of her actions on the complainants and the greater society and her own family. [ 57 ] Ms. McNeil is from Nova Scotia, but her mother's family are from Newfoundland. Ms. McNeil's family were unaware of their Aboriginal status until a few years ago when her maternal uncle made the discovery at a large family reunion. Ms. McNeil's maternal grandmother was from the Qalipu Mi'kmaq, however the federal government denied the family status.

They are unaware of whether there is a family history of attending residential schools and her immediate family have not practiced cultural events nor have been exposed to life on the reserve. Ms. McNeil does have cousins that she has not met living on the reserve land in Stevenville, Newfoundland. [ 58 ] Ms. McNeil is described by Jillian Currie, native liaison worker at Alouette Correctional Centre for women, where Ms.

McNeil has been held awaiting resolution of these matters, as having a deep connection to her culture and that she wishes to be afforded the opportunity to benefit from culturally appropriate programming. [ 59 ] The principles of sentencing that I must consider are set out in s. 718 of the Criminal Code : The fundamental purpose of sentencing is to protect society and to contribute, along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing just sanctions that have one or more of the following objectives: (

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. [ 60 ]

Section 718.1 sets out that: [Offence] must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. [ 61 ] In determining the appropriate and fit sentence, the court must consider the aggravating and mitigating factors unique to the case before them. Further, s. 718.2 sets out that: (

b) a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances; (

d) an offender should not be deprived of liberty, if less restrictive sanctions may be appropriate in the circumstances; (

e) all available sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to victims or to the community should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders. [ 62 ] The aggravating factors in this case are: 1. Ms. McNeil has a lengthy criminal record. Although not specifically related, it does disclose a long-standing involvement in criminal activity. 2. Ms. McNeil was on probation at the time of the first two offences and then on bail at the time of the latter offences. 3.

Little, if anything, would deter the offending behaviour while Ms. McNeil was in the community. A search warrant conducted at a residence and all illegal property seized on January 11th, 2017, was not enough to deter her from further reoffending and, in fact, she recommenced the enterprise immediately. She then, despite being arrested and released on specific and stringent conditions designed to deal with her drug addiction and to further prohibit possession of identification documents not in her own name, reoffended while living in her mother's home. 4.

Her offences were sophisticated, broad-reaching and took place over a prolonged period of time. This was not a case of a brief spree spurred on solely by a drug addiction. Her actions impacted a large part of many communities. Over time, she was found in possession of significant amount of personal identification information compromising many members of the community.

This is evident in the fact that she not only possessed the identification documents and forged documents, but she possessed the instruments and materials to create the forged documents and explored Internet sources that would instruct her on how to create forged documents. These actions involved great effort, ingenuity and intelligence on the part of Ms. McNeil in furtherance of this criminal enterprise. 5. I have reviewed the information about the impact on specific complainants including Ms. Miller and Ms.

Katrina James, both documents contained in the Agreed Statement of Facts and the Pre-Sentence Report and it is quite clear that Ms. McNeil's actions violated the safety and security and privacy interest of a significant number of members of the community. It also caused considerable costs, both financially and time spent, to restore and protect their identity information and document information. 6. She was persistent and entrenched in the criminal behaviour, both to support her addiction and her lifestyle. [ 63 ] I do find because of these factors that Ms.

McNeil has a high degree of moral culpability. [ 64 ] The mitigating factors: 1. Ms. McNeil entered guilty pleas which both counsel submit were done in a timely way. I accept that, in light of the complexity of the cases and the requisite time it would have taken for counsel to receive, review and determine how best to proceed the disposition on these matters. In the context of the number of allegations and the complicated nature of the matters, I accept that Ms. McNeil's guilty pleas have spared lengthy court days and resources. 2. I also accept that Ms.

McNeil has gained a better understanding of the impact on others that her actions have had and that she is genuinely remorseful. 3. Ms. McNeil has some supports in the community, her mother and her ex-boyfriend, who will assist Ms. McNeil in her successful reintegration into the community. As well, she has two children living with Mr. Donald with whom Ms. McNeil enjoys a positive relationship. 4. Ms. McNeil is an individual who has struggled with long-standing addiction issues and has had periods of stability, significantly approximately 14 to 15 years in the past.

She is capable of overcoming her addiction and has expressed a willingness to address her addiction issues, but she wishes to do so by way of non-residential programming. 5. Ms. McNeil has mental health issues including the effects of childhood trauma, depression and anxiety. Ms. McNeil is engaged with mental health professionals while being in custody awaiting resolution of these matters and is willing to continue with treatment and counselling going forward. 6. Ms.

McNeil is an Aboriginal woman who strongly identifies with her heritage and is entitled, pursuant to the Gladue principles, the consideration of all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances and consistent with the harm done to victims or to the community. [ 65 ] Clearly, both counsel submit that incarceration is warranted in this case but still urge that the court take a tempered approach in light of Ms. McNeil's Aboriginal status and the other mitigating circumstances.

[ 66 ] I have reviewed the Crown's Book of Authorities, and the seven cases included within, set out sentencing ranges between 18 months and upwards of seven years. They involve offences with varying degrees of sophistication and community impact and offenders with varying personal histories. [ 67 ] In considering the cases, I must adopt the comments of the Honourable Judge Dohm in R. v. Adebayo , 2007 BCPC, in addressing the significance of identity theft in fraud cases. At paragraph 7 and 8, Judge Dohm aptly captures the sentiments in all the cases provided.

Paragraph 7: Identity theft offences have serious and lasting repercussions, both financially and emotionally, on completely innocent victims. The victim impact statements attest to that fact. Besides the financial losses often associated with identity theft, the victims must also spend significant amounts of time and money taking steps to prevent further violations of their identities, and there always remains the concern of when the next violation will occur.

Persons like the accused who partake in identity theft offences have made a conscious decision to opt out of all the systems the rest of society must operate in. These people must have some level of intelligence and an understanding of how all the systems work. They have weighed the costs and decided to take significant steps to partake in these offences. Society needs protection from these individuals and their schemes. Denunciation and general deterrence are paramount considerations in determining the appropriate sentence for identity theft criminals. [ 68 ] You can stand now, Ms.

McNeil, I am going to impose the sentence. [ 69 ] I am mindful that each case turns on its own unique facts and circumstances in the application of sentencing principles. Clearly the sentencing principles of denunciation and deterrence are paramount considerations in sentencing Ms. McNeil for the offences before the court. [ 70 ] Having said that, I cannot lose sight of the need for rehabilitation as, ultimately, it is through the rehabilitation of Ms.

McNeil that she will be able to return to live a law-abiding and productive life in the community. [ 71 ] Accordingly, in factoring in the aggravating and mitigating factors and applying the totality principle to ensure that the sentence is not unduly harsh, I find that a cumulative period of incarceration of three years is appropriate. [ 72 ] The sentences are as follows. [ 73 ] Court File Number 202153, the Port Coquitlam Count 1 breach of probation by failing to report, I am imposing a 30-day jail sentence. [ 74 ] Court File Number 98120, the Port Moody Information, I am imposing a six-month concurrent sentence on each count and concurrent to the sentence on 202153. [ 75 ] I will give time credited of six months to those two Informations, leaving a one-day sentence, concurrent one to the other, on each of those Informations.

As I have indicated, that six months is a concurrent sentence on Counts 2, 3 and 4 of that Information and concurrent to the previous breach Information. [ 76 ] Court file 97739, the Port Coquitlam matter, I am imposing a six-month sentence on each count, so Counts 2 and 3 of that Information, but they are to be consecutive to Informations 202153 and 98120. I credit six months’ time spent in pre-trial custody to this sentence, leaving one day remaining to be served on that Information. That one day being consecutive to the above two.

So in relation to those, there is two days, one consecutive to the other remaining on those. [ 77 ] In relation to Court File Number 220790-C3, I am imposing a two-year less one day sentence on each count, Counts 3, 4 and 6, concurrent one to the other. I will apply the remaining times credited which I believe, if I am correct, would be 30 days because there were two days left over. Originally, the original time, if I am correct, Ms. Cronin, was 367 days. There were two days and then the 28 days equals 30 days which is time served, which I am crediting at 45 days.

So on that matter there remains a 22 and a half-month sentence to serve. So it was originally a two years less a day, it leaves a 22 and a half-month sentence, if my calculations are correct. That sentence is consecutive to 202153, 98120 and 97739. So in relation to those three matters, there are two days remaining in addition left over after the time served. [ 78 ] On Information Court File Number 220790-A2, I am imposing a 60-day sentence concurrent.

So on that Count 1, that 60 days is concurrent to Information 220790-C3. [ 79 ] On Court File Number 98794, I am imposing an 18-month sentence concurrent on Counts 1 through 4 and concurrent to Information 220790-C3 and 220790-A2, but consecutive to the previous three, 202153, 98120 and 97739. On that Information I will attach a three-year probation order. [ 80 ] So Madam Registrar and Ms.

McNeil, the three-year probation order applies to 98794 which is the last substantive matter that you were involved in. [ 81 ] Information 97739-A2 from Burnaby, I am imposing a 75-day sentence on each breach count, concurrent one to the other and concurrent to Informations 98794, 220790-C3 and 220790-A2, but consecutive to the first three, 202153, 98120 and 97739. [ 82 ] So ultimately what that means, Ms. McNeil, and I will get to the probation order, that you have a 22 and half-month sentence remaining. So that is a provincial period of time and I am attaching a three-year probation order.

The purpose of that order primarily is your rehabilitation but also to ensure that you can transition safely into the community. [ 83 ] The conditions of that order are going to be that you keep the peace and be of good behaviour, that you must appear before the

court when required to do so by the court. [ 84 ] You must notify the court or probation officer in advance of any change of name or address.

Promptly notify the court or probation officer of any change of employment or occupation. [ 85 ] You shall report to a probation officer within 72 hours of your release from custody and thereafter as and when directed. [ 86 ] You shall reside where directed by the probation officer and not change your residential address without the prior written permission of the probation officer. [ 87 ] You may have no contact directly or indirectly with Katrina James, Yeung Ling Carol Lau, Joanna Kim, Victoria Vitek, Lori Miller and I wanted submissions.

Theodor Trent, the co-accused, are there any issues with that? [ 88 ] MS. CRONIN: I believe that, Your Honour, she is not in a romantic relationship with him.

They've been acquaintances in the past and -- [ 89 ] THE COURT: I am going to impose that condition unless otherwise ordered by the court. [ 90 ] You shall not be found within 100 metres of any residence, place of employment, place of education or place of worship known to you to be that of Katrina James, Yeung Ling Carol Lau, Joanna Kim, Victoria Vitek, Lori Miller and Theodor Trent. [ 91 ] You must attend, participate in and successfully complete any counselling which may include residential programs as directed by the probation officer. You will have discussions with your probation officer.

They will want to provide you the best opportunity for you and they will certainly consider your wishes in making that determination of what assistance you need in the community. [ 92 ] You shall not possess any identification documents, including but not limited to credit cards, debit cards, driver's licences, birth certificates, not in your own name. [ 93 ] If I remember correctly, the DNA order you had no submissions. [ 94 ] MS. CRONIN: On the? [ 95 ] THE COURT: DNA order. [ 96 ] MS.

CRONIN: I do not. [ 97 ] THE COURT: I will impose a DNA order and that can be done while in custody. [ 98 ] I am imposing a forfeiture order of all offence-related items. [ 99 ] MS. CRONIN: Yes. I can advise that Mr. Fortino and I have been communicating and I expect that we will be forwarding an actual written order for Your Honour's signature, but that matter is still under -- we haven't been able to finalize that prior to the attendance before Your Honour today. [ 100 ] THE COURT: All right. So the forfeiture order will come at a later date. [ 101 ] MS.

FOWLDS: If I can just clarify with respect to the forfeiture order, it will relate to file 220790 and Port Coquitlam file 98794. [ 102 ] MS. CRONIN: That's my expectation, yes. [ 103 ] THE COURT: Victim fine surcharges are payable forthwith, in default one day concurrent one to the other and concurrent to the above sentences. [ 104 ] MS. FOWLDS: If I can just seek some clarification. Your Honour, I didn't hear if there was a no contact order with the co- accused David Fitzpatrick. Was that -- [ 105 ] THE COURT: I did not include that. I did not really hear much about Mr. Fitzpatrick.

Are you seeking that? [ 106 ] MS. FOWLDS: The Crown is asking for a no contact with David Fitzpatrick. I understand he is a co-accused on this. [ 107 ] MS. CRONIN: I believe on the Port Coquitlam matter. I don't have any submissions. If my friend ask Your Honour to -- [ 108 ] THE COURT: All right. And I will add, Madam Registrar, to the no contact and non-attendance, to include David Fitzpatrick. [ 109 ] MS. FOWLDS: All right. And with respect to the identity documents, not having possession of those, I didn't hear, but did you include credit cards and -- [ 110 ] THE COURT: Yes.

I did. [ 111 ] MS FOWLDS: Yes, you did. [ 112 ] THE COURT: I said including but not limited to credit cards, debit cards, driver's licences, birth certificates. [ 113 ] MS. FOWLDS: Thank you, Your Honour. As well, if there could be a no contact while she is in custody pursuant to s. 743.21 with Theodor Trent, please, and David Fitzpatrick and that will cover the custodial portion of her sentence.

[ 114 ] MS. CRONIN: I have no issues with that, at this time, if Your Honour wishes to impose it. [ 115 ] MS. FOWLDS: Thank you. [ 116 ] THE COURT: Pursuant to s. 743.21, I will impose a no contact order while Ms. McNeil is in custody. No contact directly or indirectly with Theodor Trent or David Fitzpatrick. [ 117 ] MS. FOWLDS: And now, the Crown directs a stay of proceedings with respect to the Port Coquitlam files 98120, Count 1; Port Coquitlam file 97739, Count 1; Surrey file 220790-3C, Count 1, 2 and 5 against Juanita McNeil only; Surrey file 220790-2A, Count 2 and 3; and Port Coquitlam file 98794, Count 5. I believe that that concludes it. (REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)