Territorial Court

R. v. Furlong, 2003 NWTTC A17
Date: 20030917
Docket: T-1-CR-2003000576; T-1-CR-2003000577;
T-1-CR-2003000810; T-1-CR-2003000874

IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES

IN THE MATTER OF:


HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN


- and -


ROBERT FURLONG


Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence delivered by The Honourable Judge R.M. Bourassa, sitting in Yellowknife, in the Northwest Territories, on the 19th day of June, A.D. 2003.


APPEARANCES:

Mr. P. Falvo:   Counsel for the Crown

Mr. G. Boyd:   Counsel for the Defendant


(Charges under 733.1(1), 145(3), 266 Criminal Code of Canada)


THE COURT:   I have to sentence the accused for six charges - two charges of assault, two charges of breach of undertaking or recognizance, and two charges of breach of probation. The accused has a terrible criminal record. Approximately 37 criminal convictions, including 13 for offences of violence or violent-related, prior assaults on his spouse, prior assaults on peace officers, numerous convictions for failing to comply with Court orders. He is essentially unmanageable by paper. He has received a variety of sentences, most of them have been short, and those sentences have obviously had absolutely no impact on him, in modifying his conduct, making him assess his drinking habits. It has just been a revolving door at the coffee shop for this man. Sentences just have no impact at all.

I have to look at that criminal record, and for the approximately 37 criminal convictions, there are many victims that have paid the price of this man's alcohol abuse and this manes violence. In the instances before me, I have two women, one who was stomped on with such force that it left imprints of his shoes and the pattern of his shoes or boots on her body or face. Another one who tries to help her friend, beaten. The man is in a rage. He could just as well have killed them. Everybody is drunk, but it is Furlong that is in a rage.

[Page 1]

The release documents and breach of probation, it boggles the mind. It's difficult to understand how come he keeps getting released, because it's clear on the record that those documents have absolutely no impact on modifying his conduct. It just doesn't. It's a waste of time, it's a waste of paper and ink. However, be that as it may, I have to sentence for the breaches of probation and the breaches of undertaking, and perhaps some day when he is 50 or 60, he'll recognize that when he is on a Court order that there will be consequences if he fails to comply with them. That's all we can say at this stage, because those paper orders are not having any effect on modifying his conduct. All they are is -- the only effect they're having is adding to the terms of imprisonment that he's now receiving on a regular basis.

I have to take totality into account and I do. I am doing that by reducing some sentences from what I think would otherwise be appropriate and making others concurrent. I have to take into account his pre-trial custody; but in doing so, I have to -- I'm entitled to look at why he was in pre-trial custody, and one can only say that it is his own fault. Absolutely, comprehensively, without a question, his own fault. Even with all of the convictions that he had for breaches of recognizances, breaches of probation orders, he was released when he was first arrested.

[Page 2]

He committed a series of offences, was released again. And the reason why he is in custody is because he is just not manageable. So, yes, I take it into account, but it's his own fault and that militates against the effect of the pre-trial custody.

I have listened to the submissions of Crown and defence. In my view, applying the law as I understand it and trying to achieve certain goals specifically to protect people from this man and his drinking, specifically to make him understand that these are not little, minor matters, and specifically to condemn the brutal assault specifically on Ongahak, who was stomped on the face -- he's big, he's strong. That's - What can I say? - unacceptable. It's barbaric.

Stand up, Mr. Furlong. Anything you want to say?

THE ACCUSED:  I'd just like to apologize to the victims. I was going through a stressful period that time and -- I was raised up in a very, very violent family and still. Jennifer, I'd like to apologize to her. All the time that I was -- I met her and that, I was supposed to take care of her. The only one person I never took care of was myself. And I want to apologize to all the people for wasting their time. I just wish I could take it back, but I'm already in here, so ready to take whatever you give me.

THE COURT:   On the charge of assault on Miss Ongahak, five months and fifteen days in jail.

[Page 3]

On the charge of assault on Miss Lafond, five months, consecutive. On the first charge of breach of probation, three months, consecutive. On the first charge of breach of undertaking, three months, consecutive. On the other charge of breach of probation and breach of undertaking, three months, concurrent. I make that to be fifteen and a half months. There will be a DNA order. There won't be a firearms order.

THE COURT CLERK:  Thank you, sir.


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

Jane Romanowich,
Court Reporter

[Page 4]