R. v. Tron Gamblin, 2023 MBKB 86

Date: 20230609 Docket: CR 21-01-38547 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: R. v. Tron Gamblin Cited as: 2023 MBKB 86 COURT OF KING’S BENCH OF MANITOBA B E T W E E N: ) APPEARANCES: ) HIS MAJESTY THE KING, ) RUSTYN ULLRICH ) for the Crown- and – ) ) TRON GAMBLIN, ) BRETT GLADSTONE ) for the accusedaccused.) ) ) JUDGMENT DELIVERED: ) June 9, 2023 NOTICE OF RESTRICTION ON PUBLICATION: By court order pursuant to 486.5(1) ofthe Criminal Code, any information that could identify the victim or witness shall not bepublished in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way.

KEYSER J. [1] At issue in this case is the appropriate sentence for Tron Gamblin (Gamblin) who was found by me to be in contempt of court. Gamblin left threatening and identifying messages on Facebook involving witnesses at his son Jesse Gamblin’s (Jesse) murder trial. Thiswas done after specifically being ordered by me not to identify these witnesses. Counsel could not provide precedents involving the typeof contempt committed by Gamblin. There are, however, contempt precedents that are of assistance in determining the parameters of thesentence and the appropriate factors that must be considered.

Most sentences for contempt of Court that attract a lengthy period ofincarceration involve a refusal to testify at trial. In R. v.

Asselin, 2019 MBCA 94 the Court said: [57] A brief review of sentences for similar offences demonstrates a range of 12 months to three years’ incarceration for a first offenceof contempt by persons who refuse to be sworn or testify in murder or serious violent-offence trials (see, for example, Regina v Lamer(1973), (QC CA), 17 CCC (2d) 411 (Qc CA) (one year―murder); R v Neuburger, 1995 CarswellBC 1682 (CA) (15months―murder); Jacob (two years―murder); R v Amyotte and Abdullah, 2008 MBCA 48 (36 months―murder); R v Yegin, 2010ONCA 238 (three years―murder); R v McMillan, 2011 BCSC 1537 (18 months—kidnapping and significant assault); and R v Bidesi,2016 BCSC 171 (24 months―murder)).

The Court in Asselin further references comments of Scott CJM in R. v. Jacob, 2008 MBCA 7, as follows: [56] In R v Jacob, 2008 MBCA 7, Scott CJM, writing for the Court, stated (at paras 25-26): The purpose of criminal contempt is explained by Mr. Justice E. G. Ewaschuk¸ Criminal Pleadings & Practice in Canada, 2nd ed., looseleaf (Aurora: Canada Law Book, 2007) as follows (at para. 29:0040): Criminal contempt is aimed at punishing public acts which tend to bring the administration of justice into disrepute and interfere with thedue administration of justice.

It is directed at the protection of the integrity of the administration of justice. Its general purpose is toprotect the fairness of the trial process. General deterrence is the principal factor to be considered when a witness refuses to testify. See Neuburger [R v Neuburger, 1995CarswellBC 1682 (CA)]. The highest custodial sentences for contempt are imposed when a witness refuses to be sworn or to give

evidence. See Clayton C. Ruby, Sentencing, 6th ed. (Markham: LexisNexis Canada Inc., 2004) at para. 23.445. [ 2 ] The facts of this case are not ones of failure or refusal to testify, but are arguably more serious than that, and involve a direct attack on the administration of justice. Gamblin’s actions directly compromised the safety of witnesses who already were reluctant to testify and who now are looking over their shoulders for the foreseeable future.

The actions of Gamblin were intended to undermine the fairness of the trial process. [ 3 ] At Jesse’s murder trial, I was made aware that Gamblin had also threatened the same vulnerable civilian witnesses at Jesse’s preliminary inquiry. These vulnerable witnesses were part of the meth community along with Jesse. Gamblin was disruptive in the courtroom, requiring me to stop proceedings in order to admonish him for his behaviour. This occurred before I even knew that he was Jesse’s father.

As a result of Gamblin’s ongoing and improper behaviour, the Crown asked for an order that Gamblin be excluded from the Courtroom while the two civilian witnesses testified and further that an order be made that the witnesses’ names not be broadcast or published in any way or by any means, including on social media. Gamblin was in Court when that order was made on May 10, 2022 at the start of Jesse’s murder trial.

There were real concerns expressed for the safety of both witnesses as well as for their willingness to testify given the nature of earlier threats, and the fact that the allegation of murder against Jesse involved an attack on a woman he believed had “ratted him out”. [ 4 ] Notwithstanding my explicit order, Gamblin made several posts on Facebook on June 10, 2022 after the civilians had testified. A report detailing these captured Facebook postings by Gamblin was prepared by Detective Sergeant Paul Barber.

The report was entered as Exhibit #S3 and included the following threatening messages, complete with emojis: Tron Gamblin (June 10, 2022 8:21 AM) I am so fkn pleased with this news atm and it keeps getting better;D.B.…Senior RAT, F.B.’s son got stupidly murdered bcz he was a RAT Then RAT F.B. seniors daughter R.P. suffered the same fate bcz it is a Universal Law.RATS don’t belong on Mother Earth… So 2 left,the Sumu Wrestler; S.S. and the leader of the RAT PACK,F.B.

Senior and to top it off, F.B. is also a skinner WORD (Exhibit #S3, Page 3) Tron Gamblin (June 10, 2022 7:13 AM) And here, the supposedly solid guy(Solid as diarrhea) as you can see was the first to make a statement but I’m comforted in knowing that RATS S suffer the death syndrome (Exhibit #S3, Page 4) Tron Gamblin (June 10, 2022 7:03 AM) This 900 pound RAT sang and pointed fingers ar Jesse Jordan Gamblin’s murder trial…ugly as fuck she is too (Exhibit #S3, Page 5) Tron Gamblin (June 10, 2022 6:35 AM) Another RAT dead…she got on the stand and sang like a RAT/STOOL pigeon at Jesse Jordan Gamblin’s murder trial before the guitar was even tuned on May 17/2022…now she’s in RAT HELL with Judas Isscariot (Exhibit #S3, Page 6) Tron Gamblin (June 10, 2022 7:13 AM) This fucking GOOF/RAT made a statement against my SOLID son, Jesse Jordan Gamblin for a murder and he got shot and killed for it (Exhibit #3, Page 7) [ 5 ] S.S. and R.P. were the specific civilian witnesses whose identity I ordered not to be revealed.

Gamblin not only identified the witnesses but called them rats and essentially called for them to be killed. He more disturbingly, also somehow managed to get possession of copies of the front pages of the police interviews of these witnesses and others and posted photos of these pages online as well. These posts remained on Facebook until June 22, 2022. To date, we do not know how many people have seen these posts. [ 6 ] Gamblin has been in custody since July 31, 2022, a total of 307 days. At an enhanced rate of 1.5 he is entitled to a pre-sentence credit of 460 days.

Filed on the sentencing as Exhibit #S1 was a Pre-Sentence Report (PSR) & Gladue report. Exhibit #S2 was Gamblin’s criminal record which is extensive but has no entries on it since 2014. [ 7 ] The position of the Crown is that an appropriate period of incarceration is 3 to 3.5 years minus pre-trial detention, after taking

into consideration Gladue factors. The defence position is a Conditional Sentence Order (CSO), or if unacceptable, a go forward position of 6 - 12 months. [ 8 ] In the PSR it is apparent that there are significant Gladue factors at play. Gamblin was subjected to the residential school experience which included cultural assimilation as well as serious sexual and physical abuse by a priest at the school. He is only recently starting to deal with the impact of that abuse. He expressed remorse in the PSR but I openly queried the genuineness of that.

Gamblin has behaved in a threatening manner towards witnesses and been disruptive in court in other circumstances involving Jesse. These were not situations where contempt citations were made, nor charges authorized, but they demonstrate an ongoing and repetitive effort by Gamblin to interfere in the administration of justice. To be crystal clear, I am not punishing Gamblin for those other incidents. However, this repeated behavior by him is why I seriously questioned his purported remorse for his actions.

In addition, Gamblin expressed that his reason for acting as he did was that he believed Jesse to be innocent of the murder charge and that he did not want him to be “railroaded”. This rings somewhat hollow given that Jesse was already incarcerated for a machete attack on a different woman while he was being tried for the murder of Norma Andrews, which was also committed using a machete. To his credit, at least Gamblin readily admitted to what he had done. [ 9 ] This is not an easy decision. There are a number of mitigating factors in Gamblin’s case: 1.

He acknowledged his contempt without the necessity of a trial to establish the facts. 2. Although he has a lengthy and serious criminal record, he has had no convictions since 2014. 3. There are significant Gladue factors at play. 4. Gamblin is 63 years old and his incarceration to date, has not been easy. He frequently uses a wheelchair because of a number of falls that have occurred while incarcerated.

He has also been seen by a psychiatrist for symptoms related to post-traumatic stress disorder and is on various medications for pain because of a degenerative disc disease. [ 10 ] On the other hand, the contemptuous behaviour by Gamblin is egregious. He put the lives of witnesses at great risk, particularly while they were testifying about the death of a woman who was killed by Jesse for allegedly being “a rat”.

The concern for their well- being is legitimate and ongoing, especially since they belong to the meth community where violence in not uncommon. [ 11 ] General deterrence and denunciation must play a major role in the sentence imposed in this case. Were it not for the mitigating factors in Gamblin’s history, in my view, a sentence higher than that recommended by the Crown would be appropriate. I believe Gamblin’s actions to be much more serious than refusing to testify at court. What he did goes to the very heart of the administration of justice.

Defence counsel suggested that a CSO was available and appropriate in this case, given Gamblin’s time in custody. However, if the appropriate sentence is more than two years’ incarceration, the fact that the time already served would bring the sentence going forward to less than two years does not make a CSO available. In any event, in my view, a CSO would be completely inappropriate in this case. It would send the wrong message to the public at large, and to like-minded people.

This is particularly so given that this is not the first occasion that Gamblin has tried to intimidate witnesses in cases involving his son Jesse. [ 12 ] A sentence of three years, minus time served is appropriate in these circumstances. As indicated earlier, Gamblin will be credited with 460 days served. That leaves a sentence as of today of 645 days (or approximately 21 months.) [ 13 ] Convictions for criminal contempt of court are not automatically added to a person’s criminal record.

As a result, I would ask the Crown attorney in this case to correspond with the Winnipeg Police Service to ensure that Gamblin’s record accurately reflects this conviction and sentence. ________________________________ J.