R. v. D.R.Z. Date:, 2011 BCPC 395

Citation: R. v. D.R.Z. Date: 20111202 2011 BCPC 0395 File No: 86684-1; 86933-1-T Registry: Port Coquitlam IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. DRZ ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE ST. PIERRE Counsel for the Crown: H. Sangha Counsel for the Accused: A. Glouberman Place of Hearing: Port Coquitlam , B.C.

Date of Hearing: December 2, 2011 Date of Judgment: December 2, 2011 [ 1 ] THE COURT : DRZ is being sentenced for two incidences totalling four charges. [ 2 ] The earlier one in time is March 10th, 2011, which was a robbery of an HSBC Bank located on North Road in Coquitlam with an imitation firearm. The second charge arising from that incident is using an imitation firearm during the commission of that robbery. [ 3 ] The other charge is that two weeks later, April 6th, 2011, he committed another robbery with an imitation firearm at the CIBC branch in Langley.

Again, the first charge is while armed with an offensive weapon, an imitation firearm, while committing a robbery, and then using that imitation firearm during the commission of the robbery. [ 4 ] Consequently, there are two counts under s. 344(1) of the Criminal Code , and two counts under s. 85(2) of the Criminal Code . [ 5 ] Section 85(2) of the Criminal Code carries one-year minimum sentences that, prior to the consideration of any totality principle, are to run consecutively to each other. [ 6 ] DRZ is 41 years old.

The aggravating circumstances are that he has a long criminal record which started when he was a youth. [ 7 ] I have the benefit of a pre-sentence report which describes an upbringing that had some challenges, obviously, and some burdens, an alcoholic father and an abusive stepmother that led to DRZ leaving the house early at the age of 15 and trying to make a go on his

own. Eventually, he fell in with a bad peer group and a roommate's father precipitated his involvement into the drug trade, not only abusing drugs himself, but trafficking in drugs at a very young age. [ 8 ] One of the earlier sentences that he served was at the old Oakalla prison when he was a 17-year-old.

At that time, he experienced a tragic and traumatic incident while in the custody of the state in that he was sexually abused by a correctional officer there, Roderick McDougall, who was an infamous correctional officer that worked in Oakalla in the 1970s and 1980s when a number of incidences occurred with young men. Mr. McDougall was subsequently convicted. Several of the young men later on sued Mr. McDougall and the Province civilly for the abuse that occurred. That was in 1988 when DRZ was 18.

The decision with respect to the civil case went into DRZ's history in a very detailed fashion. [ 9 ] It is noted that prior to that traumatic incident, DRZ was involved in some criminal behaviour, and was addicted to cocaine at the time. But it is also noted he did not have an extensive criminal history, nor did he display any signs of a personality disorder or extreme anti-social behaviour prior to those assaults.

Afterwards, he became addicted to heroin and his criminal behaviour began to escalate, which resulted in spending most of the next 15 years behind bars. [ 10 ] I have heard in this case, as well, that his time in jail was characterized by intense hostility towards correctional staff which usually resulted in lengthy periods of difficulties for him inside and outside the institutional setting. [ 11 ] DRZ has not done well since that time and the civil case recognizes that much of that can be attributed to the trauma that was experienced by him while he was in a custodial setting.

Obviously, he recognizes, and has said as much here today, that while, in his mind, he has never resolved and dealt with those issues in a satisfactory fashion, he recognizes and takes responsibility for his own decisions that he has made over the last 20 years or so. He takes responsibility for his part at least in making those decisions. It cannot be stressed enough that that traumatic incident had to have had an impact on him. [ 12 ] That incident, I am told, was not raised in his last sentencing hearing for those robberies that he was sentenced for in 2004.

The civil case with respect to the abuse that DRZ suffered was in 2004. [ 13 ] His record is not one that he is proud of, I am sure, and it reflects essentially, and I think as counsel for the Crown has fairly characterized, periods of criminal behaviour broken up by periods of time in custody.

It is not something that DRZ can look at and be proud of, that is for certain. [ 14 ] Again, in 2004, the latest and most significant sentence that he served in December 2004 is a six-year jail sentence for a string of robberies that occurred prior to that which involved certainly more violent incidents than the ones before the court now. [ 15 ] DRZ was out on conditional release from that federal penitentiary sentence when these incidents occurred, but he has after that release entered into a positive relationship with Ms. T (phonetic) and had a taste of what it is like to be a normal family man.

She has a four-year-old daughter who he says he has taken on as his own daughter. I am told, and I accept, that he had a very positive taste of what it was like to have a normal family life and to be a dad to a young girl, and to have a job and a relationship, somebody to come home to. [ 16 ] He had a roofing job for a while and was apparently doing well, but got injured again so that he could not work, was taking painkillers for that injury, and began experiencing some financial troubles as well.

Also, as a result of taking the painkillers, he fell into consuming other illicit narcotics and re-established his connection with heroin of which he suffered an addiction for some time. [ 17 ] I am told that when he committed these robberies, he owed a debt to some drug dealers, and the combination of that and consuming narcotics led him to commit these two robberies. [ 18 ] DRZ suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder attributable to the incident at Oakalla.

He also suffers from Attention Deficit Disorder and takes prescribed medication for that condition. [ 19 ] The Crown submits that, in light of DRZ's unenviable record, and in the circumstances of these offences, which, in light of the victim impact statements, were very traumatic incidences viewed by the people who were involved, the customer service representatives, to have someone come into the bank with what looks like a firearm and then aggressively demand money in the fashion that DRZ did had to have been a very frightening and horrible experience for them, I am sure he accepts.

Some of them say they still suffer from the impact of that. [ 20 ] I agree with Crown that the young woman who wrote the last victim impact statement was quite fair in saying how it affected her. Ms. Eadie (phonetic) said it is not the most serious of robberies, but it has affected her, maybe not in a life-altering way, but an unnecessary way that did not need to happen, and she did not need to experience it and nobody needs to experience that. [ 21 ] The paranoia it causes people, how it affects society in a fundamental way has to weigh on DRZ.

He has to agree that when these things happen in our society, society changes. Where you formerly gave people the benefit of the doubt when you dealt with them in your shop, or in the bank or place of business, and you did not think they were dangerous and were going to cause you any harm, you become paranoid about people after an incident such as this, and certainly become paranoid about men who come in wearing hoodies, even though it might be simply that their head is cold.

But just the sad fact is that the first thing that pops into your mind after going through one of these events is that something bad is going to happen. It goes a little to destroy the fabric of our safe communities and our society. That is sad. [ 22 ] The Crown submits that the aggravating circumstances, the terrible record consisting of eight robberies in the last 11 years with the last sentence being a six-year sentence, that an eight-year sentence is appropriate and that would be essentially a six-year sentence plus one year on both, consecutive. Crown raised R. v.

Stauffer , 2003 BCSC 2031 , which is the case that I was provided with where essentially an eight-year sentence would have been appropriate with the two consecutive offences, but taking into account Stauffer and the totality principle, that an eight-year sentence would be the appropriate sentence in this case. [ 23 ] Ms. Glouberman, for the defence, says that five years is appropriate because that would be a three-year federal sentence

concurrent on both of those robberies and then one year consecutive on each of the imitation firearm offences would be appropriate,taking into account the fact that rehabilitation is still realistic for DRZ, and the mitigating circumstances that have not been taken intoaccount before, that being the very disturbing and traumatic abuse that he suffered at the hands of a state agent early on his life. As well,there was an early guilty plea. There is the fact that he commenced a positive relationship for a time there with Ms.

Tangen and her four-year-old daughter. [24] The range is a great one in these kinds of cases. I can tell from seeing DRZ, and hearing him, that he could be, and can be attimes, I am sure, a very likeable and positive man. [25] DRZ does not come across as somebody who is so completely detached from reality or completely incapable of having someinsight into his past bad decisions. But, at the same time, you have to recognize that you cannot continue to offend and to consolidatethe reasons for all of that offending by just raising your past and that horrific incident that you went through.

You have to, at somepoint, realize that it has to be put into some context, and into a context of an overall life that you want to live, which is a positive one, andstart making decisions that would promote your positive life instead of simply going back into old habits.

It has to occur to you that theonly way to stay out of custody, the only way to have your positive relationship with your family is to make decisions that do not includecriminal behaviour. [26] You are a man, and you look in the mirror and you know that there had to be some consequences out of this, and you know thatfrom past experience. [27] It seems that there are obviously people who care about him. There are people here in court. Ms. T is here with her youngdaughter. [28] What is the appropriate sentence? I recognize, and it is a full recognition, that the public deserves to be safe from this kind ofconduct.

How that is to be effected is the question. If DRZ can overcome and deal with his issues as far as the psychological issues thathe has to deal with, and his addiction issues, there is a good chance that he could start making the appropriate choices. [29] At the same time, he has not shown a great deal of aptitude in rehabilitating himself. There is always a prospect of rehabilitation,but the public deserves to be protected, as well.

So the balance is always a difficult one. [30] In my mind, DRZ, there has to be some recognition that what is found to be a fact of the traumatic abuse that you suffered as ayoung man, and as found in your civil case to be certainly a major contributing factor in your subsequent criminal behaviour and yourattitude in general, society has to take some responsibility for that. That was abuse conducted by a state agent, and that is tragic. But atthe same time, it cannot be the only answer for you. It cannot be how it defines you for the rest of your life.

You need to make somechanges. [31] In my mind, the appropriate sentence in this case, taking into account all of those factors, taking into account the fact that theCourt of Appeal, in R. v. Furness, 2007 BCCA 492 , [2007] B.C.J. No. 2229, said that over-emphasizing denunciation anddeterrence is not appropriate if there is some promise that a person can be rehabilitated. But having due consideration to your record andthe impact your actions have had on society, I think a four-year concurrent sentence on count 1 in both Informations is appropriate.

I amobliged to add one year consecutive for count 2 on each of those Informations. The appropriate sentence in this case, therefore, is a six-year sentence. [32] I am also obliged to give you credit for four-and-a-half months that you have served. So the 72 months is reduced, given the factthat you have served four-and-a-half months, to 67-and-a-half months of new time.

That is the sentence for DRZ, taking into account allof the factors which again are very difficult to balance. [33] Obviously, the prison officials, the people who you deal with on a daily basis, will determine how early or how much remissiontime you are going to earn as a result of serving the sentence. I guess you have learned from past experience, and you have accepted andtold me as much, and I have read as much, that the previous way that you used to deal with prison authorities and authority figures ingeneral is not actually going to assist you in getting out early, is it?

So you need to make a fundamental change in your attitude abouthow you engage the services that are available to you in custody and how you deal with individuals in there. I know it is difficult, but itis going to get you out earlier. [34] There will be a lifetime ban on firearms under s. 109, and there will be a DNA sample that is collected from DRZ. The victimfine surcharge is waived. [35] Good luck to you. [ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED]