Nunavunmi Maligaliuqtiit

NUNAVUT COURT OF JUSTICE

Cour de justice du Nunavut

Citation: R. v. Ezekiel, 2018 NUCJ 26

Date: 20180920
Docket: 03-18-119; 03-15-134
Registry: Iqaluit

Crown: Her Majesty the Queen

-and-

Accused: Timothy Ezekiel

________________________________________________________________________

Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice Gregory Mulligan

Counsel (Crown): Martin Tooke

Counsel (Accused): Marie-Josee LaFleur

Location Heard: Iqaluit, Nunavut

Date Heard: September 18 & 20, 2018
Matters: Sentence for charges under sections 129(a), 145(3),
264.1(1)(a), 266, 267(b), 279(2), 430(4), and 733.1(1) of
the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46.

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

(Delivered Orally)

(NOTE: This document may have been edited for publication)

 2

I. INTRODUCTION

[1] I will now pronounce my sentence.

[2] By way of overview, Timothy Ezekiel pleaded guilty to a number of

counts before the court on Tuesday this week.

[3] The Crown seek a penitentiary term of 819 days, before any pre-trial
custody is calculated. The Defence submits that a fit sentence is two-
years after pre-trial credit for time served. So, both Counsel submit
that given the offences before the court, and Mr. Ezekiel’s criminal
record, a penitentiary term is warranted in these circumstances. They
are not far apart as to the global sentence.

[4] As to pre-trial custody, Mr. Ezekiel has spent 57 days in custody. I am

advised that some of those days relate to this offence, but some
relate to others, so the pre-trial credit ought to be a least 57 days, and
perhaps more if he was custody prior to any other charges.

II. THE OFFENCES BEFORE THE COURT ON FILE 03-18-119

[5] There are six counts on the Information. There are five counts that the
Crown is proceeding with. Count 1 was an assault on Josie Sharkey
contrary to Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46, s. 266. Count 2 was an
assault in Linda Simeonie contrary to s. 266. Count 4 was resisting a
peace office contrary to s. 129(a). Count 5 was breach of a probation
order contrary to s. 733.1(1), and Count 6 is an assault on Kopa Saila
contrary to s. 266.

[6] These events occurred on July 13, 2018.

III. THE OFFENCES BEFORE THE COURT ON FILE 03-18-134

[7] There are a number of counts. These events are said to have
occurred in August 2018.

[8] Count 2 was assault on Josie Saila contrary to s. 267(b). Count 3 was
threat to Josie Saila contrary to s. 264.1(1)(a). Count 4 was
confinement of Josie Saila contrary to s. 279(2). Count 5 breach of a
recognizance regarding alcohol contrary to s. 145(3). Count 8 was
breach of recognizance regarding contact with individuals contrary to
 3

s. 145(3). Count 9 was breach of order to keep the peace contrary to

s. 733.1(1). Count 12 was breach by being in the presence of Josie
Saila contrary to 145(3). And, Count 15 was breach for failure to
appear contrary to s. 733.1(1).

IV. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENCES

[9] The Crown has read the facts and those facts have been admitted by
the offender. A brief overview is warranted.

[10] With respect to the events of July 13, 2018, the police were called and
the victim was Josie Sharkey. A window was broken and the victim
was punched in the face more than once. As police arrived, Mr.
Ezekiel fled, ignoring police commands to stop. He was eventually
caught after a foot chase. He resisted arrest, but finally was lodged in
a police vehicle by three police officers.

[11] With respect to the August events, Linda Simeonie was the subject of
an unprovoked assault. She was struck in the face with such force
that her glasses were broken.

[12] Alcohol was involved in both events. And, the attack has been
described as a drunken rampage. Also in August, the offender
attacked the victim, Josie Saila, repeatedly and for hours. They had
been drinking and he refused to let her leave. He threatened to kill
her. Alcohol again was a factor.

[13] Photos of the bruising of Josie Saila were filed as exhibits, showing
her extensive bruising over several parts of her body.

V. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENDER

[14] Mr. Ezekiel is 27 years of age. He has a criminal record beginning in

2015 for assault, sexual interference, and breaches. He received a
substantial reformatory term of imprisonment and probation for 18
months. In 2016, he was found guilty of two counts of assault and a
failure to comply with a probation order. He received a further
reformatory sentence and two years’ probation. He was on probation
when these offences before the court occurred.
 4

[15] Mr. Ezekiel grew up in Cape Dorset, Nunavut, and seemed to have
had good support from his parents, but turned to alcohol in his 20s,
leading to arrest, convictions, and the counts now before the court.

A. Mitigating Factors

[16] Mr. Ezekiel pleaded guilty to these offences at a very early

opportunity. The victims were not required to testify and relive these
horrific experiences at the hands of an alcoholic on a rampage. These
were vulnerable women.

[17] A plea of guilty is certainly considered an expression of remorse.

B. Aggravating Factors

[18] Mr. Ezekiel has a criminal record for assaults and breaching court
orders. He has not learned any lessons during his prior reformatory
sentences. The victims were vulnerable and defenceless victims who
suffered serious injuries.

VI. SENTENCING PRINCIPLES

[19] The principles of sentencing are set out in s. 718 of the Criminal
Code. I can summarize those as follows:

- First, to denounce unlawful conduct,

- Second, to deter the offender and others,
- Third, to separate offenders from society where necessary,
- Fourth, to assist in the rehabilitation of offenders,
- Fifth, to provide reparations for harm done, and
- Sixth, to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders for the
harm done.

[20] The Criminal Code at s. 718.2(e) further provides: “all available

sanctions, other than imprisonment, that are reasonable in the
circumstances, and assist with the harm done to the victims or to the
community, should be considered for all offenders, with particular
attention to the circumstances of aboriginal offenders.”
 5

[21] Gladue principles need to be considered here and I am satisfied that

the joint submission of Counsel as to the penitentiary term reflect the
issue, given that dealing with such offenders is the daily fare of this
court and the experienced lawyers appearing before us.

VII. DISPOSITION

[22] When offenders are sent to the penitentiary, it is often important to

make note that their first penitentiary term should be as short as
reasonably possible given the circumstances. I am satisfied that a
penitentiary term of two years plus a day remaining to be served is a
measured response to the situation here, given Mr. Ezekiel’s criminal
record and the harm done to individuals in this case. The sentence for
each count is appended to this judgment (Appendix A).

VIII. ANCILLARY ORDERS

[23] I now turn to the ancillary orders sought by the Crown.

- There will be a DNA order, which is mandatory for these

offences.
- There will be a no contact order with the named individuals
during any period of incarceration, with an exception for if the
named individuals wish contact the offender,
- Section 110 weapons prohibition. Mr. Ezekiel can apply for a
s. 113 exemption,
- Weapons prohibition order to three years following his release,
and
- Victim fine surcharge of $200.

[24] Further, there will be a stand-alone restitution order with respect to

the damage to one individual through her glasses at a cost of $130.
This is with respect to Kopa Saila.

[25] All counts not mentioned above are stayed pursuant to Criminal Code
s. 579.
 6

IV. CONCLUSION

[26] Mr. Ezekiel, you have heard the sentence and I wish you good luck. I
hope we do not see you in this court again. It is not pleasant to give
somebody a penitentiary term, but your record indicates that this is
required.

[27] I hope you will get some treatment and assistance there in terms of
programming and that we will not see you in this court of difficulty
again.

[28] Thank you, sir.

Dated at the City of Iqaluit this 20th day of September, 2018

___________________
Justice G. Mulligan
Nunavut Court of Justice
 7

APPENDIX A

File: 03-18-119
Consecutive:
- Count 1: 120 days
- Count 2: 120 days
- Count 4: 30 days
- Count 6” 150 days

Concurrent:
- Count 5: 30 days

Total: 14 months

File: 03-18-134
Consecutive:
- Count 2: 151 days
- Count 3: 30 days
- Count 4: 60 days
- Count 5: 30 days
- Count 15: 30 days

Concurrent:
- Count 5: 30 days
- Count 8: 30 days
- Count 9: 30 days
- Count 12: 30 days

Total: 10 months plus one day

Combined total: 24 months plus one day