IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES
In the matter between: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent - end -BEN CHARLIE Appellant
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF The Honourable Mr. Justice W.G. Morrow, given at Fort McPherson, N.W.T., on the 15th day of May AD 197^ Orval J.T. Troy Esq. Q.C. for the Respondent John Bailey Esq. for the Appellant I ^
SC O^ 1H 0C(̂
TO: The- Court of Anneal for t h e Korthv.'cst T e r r i t o r i e s .
On the 9C-- I., day of 19 ^'? at î'-̂ t̂ I'-̂ ĥ r-nor , Northwest Territories, I was convicted on a charge of Ĉ r-rror .'".-.'-:̂•.̂"i-. under Section '^^•[>{'') of Crr: oefore >-ol.ic-e-kaga,s-i.r.atei - . .' J i i f roce Ol. xr" )-̂ " ce sen tenced t o ^'"'/^^^ (-'^) -̂ .̂V-I v;ish t o appea l a g a i n s t t h e .•c;qn7±crtrr(2n^j(pT .{. sen t ence ) on t h e fo l lov / ins ^^rounds : - \\ (a) I • ^ r 1 t . i-i -r-^:\^: -• C-, o .̂? o. ">^pi ' O ^ "^ '~ c^ r»"y*i»nci 1 > 'jor;:-..:L--.r.eQ.
(b) :.'' •" b T.''- ~, r- o b •;.' ? n "i: h r -•—'- Cr '', O" ( c ) ' • - I T " — > • •!••. • j ^ - l " 1 n r " i" '" -̂ • • . ; • , ' — • • ^ • • • • r - 1 . - • • - • ; • • ? ; ' : • " . • ' ' " • ; • v I T.T) (am not) desirous of being present in Person uron the hearing of this arir.eal.
) i* :ii ^ 6 (Apr ell-.mt)
'his for:.: to be nrei COnlJr I Ori-;ln::l ani d\;'̂ li'ja"e icr the Court of --r^al. Yello-;::rife ,••• Cc-oies to Inforr.'-iant, Convicting Cour'c, Crov/n Counsel and Apuellont, ^^^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^
Northv;est T e r r i t o r i e s , 29 V:"! 1973
- . • . • ' • • • - • — — — — . — ! •
7f (Mr. Troy and Mr. McConnell having addressed the court, Mr. Justice Morrow gave judgment as follows)
Well, what I am going to do is this, Mr. Troy, do you agree that I can allow the appeal to the extent of time served, plus a fine? Mr. Troy: I would just like to check the section. The Court: Then again, I don't like fines on these people when they are not working. Almost putting them in jail would be an advantage. Mr. Troy: Sir, Section 7^^ of the Criminal Code says that the general penalty for summary conviction offences such as common assault 1fl is that everyone who is convicted of an offence ptmishable on summary conviction is liable to a fine of not more than five hundred dollars or for imprisonment to six months, or to both, and where the imposition of a fine, or the making of an order for the payment of money is authorized by law, but the law does not-provide that imprisonment may be imposed in default of payment of a fine or compliance il \ with the order, the court may order that
in default of payment of the fine or compliance |i with the order, as the case may be, the defendant shall be imprisoned for a period of
?r six months, and you can fine and imprison sir, or both. The Court: Well, v;hat I am going to do is, you have here gentlemen, an indication - I am not giving my judgment - this-is the type of appeal that always gives the court great difficulty, but I don't see how I can avoid it, and it is my duty to make the best out of it that I can. Looking at this man's record and his behavior, I see no reason v/hy the original sentence of sixty days was not proper. However, at the time that it comes before me today I would not be living up to my oath to see justice done if I did not look at the accuaulativs effect of what would happen today if I dismissed the appeal, that the man would continue doing what he has been doing, will end up in effect doing an extra month, so I propose allowing the appeal in part, but I want to make it clear in doing this it is not a criticism of the Justices of the Peace in their sense, because I think they applied the right principle here in their original sentence. I hope that they appreciate in varying the sentence it is because of the peculiar circumstances that have now emerged. The appeal will be allowed in part therefore, to the time served plus an additional fine of fifty dollars, which is to be paid in three months after the two hundred d)lllar fine has bean paid, or the time has bftpn served, and in default, an extra seven days.