Supreme Court
Decision Information
Decision information:
Abstract: Transcript of reasons for sentence
Decision Content
R. v. Chocolate, 2005 NWTSC 80 Date: 20050915 Docket: S-1-CR2005000041 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES IN THE MATTER OF: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - vs - FERNAND CHOCOLATE Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence by The Honourable Deputy Justice R. P. Foisy, at Yellowknife in the Northwest Territories, on September 15th A.D., 2005. APPEARANCES: Mr. S. Hinkley: Counsel for the Crown Mr. J. Brydon: Counsel for the Accused Charge under s. 268, s. 270(1) Criminal Code of Canada Official Court Reporters THE COURT: There is no doubt that this is a serious charge and the circumstances involved in this charge are about as a serious as they can get without incurring a fatality; as the constable pointed out, either to the accused or both of them. It is true that the community has to understand that you cannot treat the very people that are there to help you this way. They are there to protect you; that's their job, that's their life. In a small community when there is trouble, who is the first that you call? It's the police. They come out there to help, sometimes at their own peril. They are not to be made punching bags and they are not to be abused. And people who do that have to understand that there is a price to pay. And people who know you, Mr. Chocolate, have to know that what you did, they can't do. In other words, they have to be deterred from doing this. You did plead guilty. That has to mean a real credit otherwise people would never plead guilty. I know in small communities jury trials are very divisive. They divide the community. They often divide some people from the community against the police. So the fact that you have seen fit to plead guilty and avoid that is to 1 your credit. You have been in custody for seven months and I am prepared to give you the two-for-one credit, two months for one served; in other words, 14 months. The penitentiary term that is being sought by the Crown, something in the area of three years, I think is extremely reasonable. Deducting from that approximately 14 months, it leaves the request made by the Crown and joined in by your counsel of two years less a day, I think, a reasonable one. The law is clear that a trial Judge is to accept the joint submission unless it is unreasonable. It is clearly within the spectrum of sentencing and I cannot say that it is unreasonable. Mr. Chocolate, you are 45 years old. You have been in and out of jail now since 1978. You must be getting tired of this. Your family and your wife must be getting awfully fed up with this, and your kids must be wondering what is going on with their father. You have to get to the position where you are fed up with this because sooner or later you are either going to quit drinking or it will kill you. Either the alcohol itself will kill you or else you will die in a fight or a brawl or not 2 wake up in a ditch some day. That's not a very good prospect, especially for a man who is described by Constable Fuhr's now wife as being very competent, caring and capable. You have got qualities but when you are drinking, that's all gone. You become less than human. For the next two years less one day, you are going to have time to think about it and that's the sentence that I am pronouncing now. I am giving some thought to probation. I know that when you get out, unless you have decided that you are going to quit drinking and you are going to change your life, perhaps probation will not help you very much. It might just set you up for some more breaches and more time in jail. And if you are determined to quit drinking, I assume that there are AA facilities available in Rae. There is other help available there too, the community has various services to help you. Turn to them instead of your drinking buddies. Look at your drinking buddies and see what alcohol has done to them and if that's what you want to go back to, then you will and then you know what will happen. So I won't impose a period of probation. I hope that some day you turn your life around and it is when you go to Constable Fuhr 3 and you say that you are sorry for what you did, and that you have already backed it up with actions and not just words. Anything else, gentlemen? MR. BRYDON: Yes, one other matter. The victims of crime surcharge I would ask that to be waived given the fact that he has been obviously incarcerated for seven months. MR. HINKLEY: Yes, sir, seems prudent. THE COURT: Yes, I will waive that. MR. BRYDON: Thank you. THE COURT: That's it? MR. HINKLEY: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Thank you, we will adjourn. (ADJOURNMENT) Certified to be a true and accurate transcript pursuant to Rules 723 and 724 of the Supreme Court Rules, Lois Hewitt, CSR(A), RPR, CRR Court Reporter 4
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.