Supreme Court

R. v. Sangris, 2003 NWTSC 51
Date: 20030828
Docket: S-0001-CR-2002000110

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

IN THE MATTER OF:


HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN


- vs. -


DEREK JASON SANGRIS


Transcript of the Oral Reasons for Sentence by The Honourable Justice J.E. Richard, at Yellowknife, in the Northwest Territories, on August 27th, A.D. 2003.


APPEARANCES:

Ms. S. Bond:   Counsel for the Crown

Mr. J. Brydon:   Counsel for the Accused


Charge under s. 236 Criminal Code of Canada


THE COURT:   This morning it is my serious responsibility to impose sentence on Derek Jason Sangris for the crime of manslaughter; that is, for causing the death of his friend, Eddie Paul Beyonnie.

It is an understatement to say that this is a tragic case. One healthy, young Aboriginal man is dead, and his family is very obviously devastated by their loss; and another healthy, young Aboriginal man faces a lengthy term in jail, and his family, though supportive, is, no doubt, shocked and devastated by what he has done.

Although every tragic case like this one is unique and very personal to the families involved, the underlying cause of this tragedy is not unusual. The underlying cause is alcohol and the abuse of alcohol by young people in our community.

I note the large number of people in the courtroom yesterday and today from N'Dilo and from Yellowknife. Everybody has now heard of the circumstances that led to Eddie Paul Beyonnie's death and to Derek Sangris being sent away to jail.

I hope that each person when they leave the courtroom today, young and old, will reflect on this underlying cause, the abuse of alcohol by young people in the community, and ask themselves if anything is going to change in the community because of this tragedy; will ask themselves if there is anything that

[Page 1]

he or she should be doing to deal with this serious social problem. Or is it the case that nothing will change? Will it only be a matter of time before another tragedy like this happens again; next month, next year or the year after that? How many bright, talented, healthy, young men like Eddie Paul Beyonnie will die before any changes are made in the community to deal with the excessive drinking by young people?

On the evening of July 11 and 12 last year, Derek Sangris and Eddie Paul Beyonnie and several other young men were drinking in N'Dilo. They were drinking two bottles of vodka and also some beer. At the time, Eddie Paul Beyonnie was 22 years old. Derek Sangris was 23.

Around midnight the group went to a bar in Yellowknife and drank there until closing time and then returned to N'Dilo. An argument broke out, and then fighting, among members of the group. Derek Sangris joined in the fighting to help one of the others and for his troubles was punched and knocked to the ground and was unconscious for a short while.

Eddie Paul Beyonnie and others also intervened to try and stop the fighting. At one point, an intoxicated Derek Sangris was heard to say to one of the others, not to Eddie Paul Beyonnie, but one of the others, that he was going to kill him. Derek Sangris was told to go home, and he ran off in the direction of

[Page 2]

his house.

At his home, Derek's brother told him to go to bed. However, after a few minutes the brother observed Derek Sangris go in the kitchen and open a drawer. As Derek Sangris was leaving the house, the brother observed something shiny in his hand and heard him utter words like, “Someone is going to die,” or, “Someone is going to get it.” The brother called the police at 2:19 a.m. and told them what he had observed.

Derek Sangris went to the home of Eddie Paul Beyonnie where Eddie Paul and Cheyenne Koyina were sitting outside. Derek Sangris threw a rock through the window of a vehicle parked beside the house. Derek Sangris then ran away from the house and Eddie Paul Beyonnie ran after him. Witnesses saw them running together, almost side by side, then saw them stop and start fighting. Although nobody saw a knife, during this altercation Derek Sangris stabbed Eddie Paul Beyonnie with a knife. Derek Sangris ran off and Eddie Paul Beyonnie staggered a short distance and then fell to the ground.

The evidence indicates that Eddie Paul Beyonnie received two stab wounds. One of these was to his left arm three centimetres deep. The other wound was the fatal wound to his chest at a depth of 18 centimetres. Derek Sangris was arrested within the hour and charged

[Page 3]

with murder.

Later in the day of July 12th, Derek Sangris gave a warned statement to the police in which he admitted stabbing Eddie Paul Beyonnie and accepted responsibility for the death of Eddie Paul Beyonnie. Last fall Mr. Sangris was committed to stand trial in this court on a charge of second degree murder.

From the outset, Mr. Sangris, through his lawyer, has offered a plea to manslaughter. In recent days, the Crown has reassessed the evidence in the case and has accepted the plea to manslaughter, acknowledging that it was unlikely to be able to prove to the jury that Mr. Sangris had the requisite mens rea for a murder conviction.

For purposes of determining a proper sentence in this case, it is to Mr. Sangris' credit that he accepted responsibility for his unlawful act from the beginning. In the circumstances here, I characterize his plea of guilty as one made at the earliest opportunity, notwithstanding the passage of 13 months. His early plea of guilty mitigates the sentence to be imposed.

The law provides a wide range of possible sentences for the crime of manslaughter from a suspended sentence to life imprisonment in a federal penitentiary. In determining the appropriate sentence, I remind myself that one of the fundamental purposes of

[Page 4]

the sentencing process is the maintenance of a safe and peaceful community. Also in this case, the objectives of the sentence to be imposed include denunciation of Derek Sangris' unlawful conduct and general deterrence.

Given the young age of this offender and, indeed, his own words to the Court in recognizing that he needs to make changes in his life, the sentence of incarceration must also be of such nature and duration that will allow him to access some meaningful counselling and rehabilitative programs.

The sentence imposed on Derek Sangris must also be one which will promote or continue in Mr. Sangris the sense of responsibility for what he has done and the acknowledgment of the harm he has done to the MacKenzie and Beyonnie family and to the community of N'Dilo.

I make note of the fact that Mr. Sangris has no criminal record and, presumably, has never been to jail before. Accordingly, any period of incarceration, wherever served, will be difficult for him.

He is 24 years of age now and has always lived in the Yellowknife area. I'm told that he attained an education level just below high school diploma and that he has had employment with RWED, with the two diamond mines and also in the restaurant industry here in Yellowknife. I am satisfied that he is genuinely remorseful for what he has done and does genuinely want

[Page 5]

to deal with his alcohol abuse and to change his life. Before proceeding further with the sentencing of Derek Sangris, I want to say a few words to the family of the deceased, Eddie Paul Beyonnie. It goes without saying that the Court extends its sympathy to you in your loss. It is obvious to the Court from the victim impact statements, both in writing and orally in open court, that Eddie Paul was a much loved member of the family and that he held the promise and expectation of a productive and happy life.

None of the rest of us can truly know the extent or depth of the pain that you are suffering. You may have your own personal views about the length of sentence that ought to be imposed. However, no matter how long or short the sentence is, it cannot bring him back and it cannot change the extent of the pain that you are feeling.

We do hope, however, that now that these criminal proceedings are coming to an end and that you have participated in these proceedings and shared your feelings publicly with the community, that your healing process will be enhanced and that you can get on with your lives now that this chapter is over and continue to cherish your memories of Eddie Paul.

One of the principles of sentencing that counsel have referred to is proportionality; that is, that the sentence to be imposed must not only be proportionate

[Page 6]

to the gravity of the crime, but also to the degree of moral blameworthiness of Derek Sangris.

On the evidence before me, I find that Derek Sangris was, indeed, intoxicated to some degree when he committed this terrible crime. From the evidence, I find that when he went to his home after the initial fighting altercation, he was in an angry mood. I find that he did arm himself with a knife from the kitchen, and from his utterances when he left the house armed with the knife, I find that he, indeed, had violent intentions; that is, that he intended to unlawfully cause harm to someone.

Although Mr. Sangris' judgment was obviously clouded because of his intoxication or drunkenness, I find that when he encountered Eddie Paul Beyonnie and Cheyenne Koyina outside of the Paul MacKenzie residence, he was trying to reignite or restart the earlier altercation because of a continuing slight that he felt.

In the ensuing physical altercation with Eddie Paul Beyonnie, he thrust a knife into Eddie Paul's chest penetrating 18 centimetres into Eddie Paul's body. Viewed objectively, that kind of unlawful assault was clearly going to subject Eddie Paul Beyonnie to the risk of serious bodily injury or, indeed, life threatening injury, and, accordingly, Mr. Sangris' culpability is at a high level on the scale of

[Page 7]

culpability or moral blameworthiness.

This was not an unlawful act that was spontaneous or impulsive. There was some planning or deliberation by Derek Sangris in retrieving the knife from the kitchen and in returning to the scene of the earlier altercation and in reigniting the situation which itself led to the final physical altercation with Eddie Paul Beyonnie and the fatal stabbing of Eddie Paul Beyonnie. This was a serious crime of violence and must result in a meaningful sentence of incarceration notwithstanding Derek Sangris' young age and lack of a previous criminal record.

Mr. Sangris has been in jail since July 12th of last year waiting for his trial on the murder charge, the trial which was to take place this week. He has, therefore, already been in custody without his liberty in excess of 13 months on account of his unlawful act. In accordance with the usual practice and binding case law, I take that fact into consideration in arriving at the ultimate duration of the period of incarceration to be imposed.

Please stand, Mr. Sangris. Derek Sangris, for the crime that you have committed, the crime of manslaughter, contrary to section 236 of the Criminal Code, it is the sentence of this Court that you be imprisoned for a period of five years.

I am going to have the Clerk of the Court endorse

[Page 8]

the warrant of committal that takes you to jail with this Court's recommendations as follows: Firstly, that you be permitted to serve your sentence at a correctional facility within the Northwest Territories. Secondly, that while serving your sentence you be given every opportunity to receive educational training and counselling and treatment to deal with alcohol abuse.

In addition, there will be the firearms prohibition order under section 109 of the Criminal Code for a period of 10 years following your release from prison.

MR. BRYDON:  That should also have a secondary order under 109(b) where he is precluded for life from possessing any restricted or prohibited weapons.

THE COURT:   If the Crown agrees, you can draft the order accordingly.

MS. BOND:   Yes, sir. I agree with that.

THE COURT:    Further, the DNA order requested by the Crown is granted. In the circumstances of your lengthy incarceration, there will be no victim surcharge. You may sit, Mr. Sangris.

Now, counsel, is there anything further on this case?

MS. BOND:   Nothing further, sir.

MR. BRYDON:  Nothing from the defence.

THE COURT:  Thank you. We will close court.

[Page 9]

(AT WHICH TIME THE ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)

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

[Page 10]