Arson with disregard for human life
R. v. J.P.D.
A publication ban applies. The offender is not named.
- Below the Crown's ask
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
The offender was found guilty after trial of arson with disregard for human life for setting fire to her suite in a supportive housing complex while other residents slept. The Crown sought two to three years' imprisonment; the self-represented offender took no real position, and amicus argued for no more than two years with probation. Justice Ker imposed two years less a day imprisonment followed by three years of probation, finding denunciation and deterrence the key objectives and the offender's mental health issues only minimally attenuating her responsibility.
In the judge's words
1In summary, this was a very serious offence that could have had catastrophic consequences, but for the building's extremely efficient fire detection system and the quick actions of the night staff and emergency responders.
The record
- Convicted of
- Arson with disregard for human life (CC 433)
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: L.J. Helps
Sources
- R. v. J.P.D., 2022 BCSC 1699 Court decision, CanLII, June 9, 2022
[5] The Crown seeks a sentence of two to three years imprisonment.
[4] The offence of arson with disregard for human life carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. Although this type of arson offence does not have a mandatory minimum sentence, s. 742.1(c) of the Code precludes a conditional sentence order ("CSO") for this offence.
[26] … has no criminal record. She has one prior entry for an unrelated offence that resulted in a conditional discharge in 2009.
[93] In summary, this was a very serious offence that could have had catastrophic consequences, but for the building's extremely efficient fire detection system and the quick actions of the night staff and emergency responders.
[95] Balancing as best I can the competing principles and objectives of sentencing, the aggravating and mitigating circumstances that I have found in this case, and … personal circumstances, as well as exercising the maximum restraint that I conclude is permissible in the circumstances, I find a fit sentence to be two years less a day imprisonment followed by a probation order of three years.
- R. v. J.P.D., 2022 BCSC 1699 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia