Courts Martial

Citation: R. v. Private C.D. Blanchard, 2009 CM 1010

Docket: 200869

STANDING COURT MARTIAL

CANADA

ALBERTA

CANADIAN FORCES BASE EDMONTON

Date: 28 July 2009

PRESIDING: COLONEL MARIO DUTIL, CHIEF MILITARY JUDGE

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

v.

PRIVATE C.D. BLANCHARD

(Offender)

SENTENCE

(Rendered Orally)

[1]  Private Blanchard, having accepted and recorded your plea of guilty in respect of the first charge under section 90 of the National Defence Act, I now find you guilty of this charge.

[2]  It has long been recognized that the purpose of a separate system of military justice is to allow the armed forces to deal with matters that pertain directly to discipline, efficiency and moral of the military. In determining sentence, I have considered the totality of the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence as revealed by the statement of circumstances that you have accepted as conclusive evidence as well as the documentary evidence while before the court in your own testimony.

[3]  The facts and circumstances surrounding the offence are simple. From 21 June 2008 to 20 July 2008, you were on annual leave. At roll call on 21 July 2008, you were absent. After inquiries by your chain of command, you were located on the next after-noon by your sergeant in the barracks. You first stated to Sergeant Johnson that your leave pass ended on 22 July 2008. Asked to produce it by both Sergeant Johnson and Warrant Officer Mehlitz, you did not do so. The evidence indicates also that in June 2008, supported by the Base Social Worker who believed that the Canadian Forces was no longer a suitable place for you, you prepared and transmitted to your chain of com-mand two requests for voluntary release mainly because of your belief that service in the Canadian Forces was no longer suitable for you to the point of breaking down and because you wanted to return home to be closer to your family, more precisely with your ill father.

[4]  Both of your requests for release and the supported letter from the Social Worker were not processed through the unit until today. Counsel for the prosecution admitted that the Acting CO of the unit has now been made aware of that situation and that your request will be processed rapidly. During your testimony you confirmed that you still intend to leave the Canadian Forces and return to PEI where you are confident to find employment rapidly through your family.

[5]  The objectives and principles to be used in considering what should be an appropri­ate sentence generally relate to one or more of the following principles and objectives:

the protection of the public, and the public of course includes the interests of the Canadian Forces; the denunciation of the offender; the punishment of the offender; the deterrent effect of the punishment not only on the offender himself or herself, but also upon others who might be tempted to commit such offences; the reformation and rehabilitation of the offender; the punishment imposed for a particular offence must be proportionate to the crime and to the offender, and the parity of sentence, i.e., a sentence should be similar to sentences imposed on similar offenders for similar offences committed in similar circumstances; and finally, the court shall take into account the mitigating and aggravating circumstances relating to the offence and to the offender.

[6]  It must be stressed that sentencing is an individualized process and that any sentence must always represent the minimum required to achieved the applicable sentencing principles and objectives and maintain discipline. The sentence in this case should emphasize the need for general deterrence, specific deterrence, denunciation of the conduct and rehabilitation.

[7]  The prosecution recommends that the court impose a sentence of detention for a period of 15 days based on the step principle in the context of your previous convictions for four similar offences. Your two last previous convictions or entries were entered one year ago at summary trial where you were sentenced to detention for a period of eight days. Defence counsel submits that the step principle should not be applied blindly and recommends that in the circumstances a sentence of a reprimand and a fine of at least 1000 dollars.

[8]  The only significant aggravating factor in this case relates to your conduct sheet which contains four entries for similar offences between 2007 and 2008. This is your fourth presence in less than three years before a service tribunal for the same miscon­duct. It is fair to say that your last three appearances occurred after your request to be voluntary released that remained silent according to admissions made by the prosecu­tion. Clearly, your motivation and ability to cope with the basic exigencies of military service have been at their lowest since June 2008. The fact that your chain of command did not process your request as it should provides context to your behaviour, but it cannot justify a blatant disregard of the basic exigency of military service; that is to show up to your place of duty. It may well be that your commanding officer would have treated you differently when he imposed detention for a period of eight days in July 2008 had he been made aware of your personal situation as well as your unprocessed request to be released of June 2008. For that reason alone, it is sufficient to exclude a blind application of the step principle.

[9]  In terms of mitigation factors, there are very few but for your plea of guilty and your young age. It is clear that military service is no longer for you, if it was ever. Unfortu­nately for you, this cannot serve as a blanket authorisation to show up to work as you see fit. You must understand, and others as well, that until you are released from the Canadian Forces, you will perform the duties expected of you for which you are receiving your pay and allowances. It is likely that you will be released from the Canadian Forces before fall 2009. The sentence I am about to pronounce should deter you from perpetuating your lack of professionalism.

[10]  Therefore, the court sentences you to detention for a period of five days and a fine of 1500 dollars. You may be seated. The sentence was pronounced at 1410 hours on 28 July 2009.

                                                                                              COLONEL M. DUTIL, CMJ

Counsel

Lieutenant-Commander S. Leonard, Canadian Military Prosecution Service

Counsel for Her Majesty the Queen

Lieutenant(N) M. Létourneau, Directorate of Defence Counsel Services

Counsel for Private C.D. Blanchard