Supreme Court

R. v. Tinqui, 2003 NWTSC 33
Date: 20040620
Docket: S-1-CR-2003000045/46

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

IN THE MATTER OF:


HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN


- v -


FREDDY WILLIAN TINQUI


Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence (Oral) delivered by The Honourable Justice J.E. Richard, in Yellowknife, in the Northwest Territories, on the 12th day of June, A.D. 2003.


APPEARANCES:

Mr. S. Niblock:   Counsel for the Crown

Mr. R. Gorin:   Counsel for the Defence


Charges under ss. 264.1(1) (a) C.C. and 267(b) c.c.


THE COURT:   Freddy Tinqui has pleaded guilty to two criminal charges arising from a serious incident of domestic violence at his hone in Rae Edzo. He is a man of 35 years of age and who has little formal education, but who appears to have been gainfully employed in the construction field in recent years. I am told that he has been living common-law with the victim since the year 2000 and that there are five young children in the household. By Mr. Tinqui's own admission, he has a serious problem with alcohol addiction and alcohol abuse. He has at least five violent convictions or assault convictions on his criminal record and has previously been to jail for assaultive behaviour.

On March 13th of this year, he and his common-law wife were drinking. During Mr. Tinqui's period of intoxication, he committed a serious vicious assault on his spouse, causing several injuries, some of which are depicted in the photographic exhibits. During the ongoing assault which continued for some time, Mr. Tinqui also threatened to continue beating his spouse until she was dead.

It is an aggravating feature that the children were in the home at the time of this appalling behaviour by Mr. Tinqui towards his wife.

Mr. Tinqui's criminal record of similar behaviour is also an aggravating feature of course.

[Page 1]

It is to Mr. Tinqui's credit that he entered an early guilty plea and have saved the state, his spouse and the community the spectacle of having to bring her to court to testify and argue about whether or not she was lying to the police in the original instance.

Mr. Tinqui must also receive credit for the three months which he has been detained in custody since the date of the assault.

I also note that Mr. Tinqui today expresses remorse for his appalling behaviour while he was intoxicated and also his acknowledgment that he must deal with his alcohol addiction.

Please stand, Mr. Tinqui.

Mr. Tinqui, you have committed a very, very serious crime and your crime is especially egregious, given your criminal record.

I want to tell you, Mr. Tinqui, that you are fortunate today that the Crown prosecutor is not seeking a sentence longer than what he is. I hope you realize that and I hope you remember that. But upon reflection, I feel that the submissions that your lawyer, Mr. Gorin, and the Crown prosecutor have made about a sentence are reasonable, and I am prepared to follow their recommendations.

I also want to mention to you, Mr. Tinqui, in terms of what your lawyer indicated on your behalf, that you have expressed a willingness to take programs

[Page 2]

and courses while you are in jail. I think you should follow up on that. This is my own personal view, I am not a professional: It is not just your alcohol addiction. What you did to your wife, what I have been told here, indicates to me that there is something else wrong. There is some other emotional problem, not just booze. You are sober now and you hear what they are saying that you did to your wife over a period of time. That is not normal. That is not just booze. So you have to deal with whatever this other emotional or anger problem is. I am not saying that you should not work on the alcohol addiction problem, but you have to work on this other thing too. I wish you well in those endeavours.

On Count number 2, the crime of assault, assaulting Sonia Akana causing bodily harm, it is the sentence of this Court that you serve a term of imprisonment of 18 months. On Count number 1, utter threat to cause death, four months concurrent.

There will be the mandatory firearms prohibition order under section 109 for a period of ten years.

The DNA order sought by the Crown is granted.

There will be a victim fine surcharge of $35.

You may sit down, sir.

Anything else on this case, counsel?

MR. NIBLOCK:  No, sir, thank you.

MR. GORIN:   No, Your Honour.

[Page 3]

THE COURT:   I want to thank counsel for their work on this case. We'l1 close court.


Certified to be a true and accurate transcript, pursuant to Rule 723 and 724 of the Supreme Court Rules of Court

Annette Wright, RPR, CSR(A)
Court Reporter

[Page 4]