MANDEL: Thankfully, no jail time for Whitby dad who fired at armed intruders who shot his son
· Toronto Sun
See more Toronto Sun on Google — save as a Preferred Source
Visit newsbetting.bond for more information.
It’s hard not to imagine any one of us being enraged dad Jason Munroe.
Fortunately, the Whitby father will not be going to jail for firing at the home invaders who shot his son – the Crown has lost its bid to overturn Munroe’s conditional sentence of house arrest.
“Given the exceptional circumstances of the offence and the significant mitigating factors, we see no error in principle in this case,” wrote Court of Appeal Justice Steve Coroza on behalf of the three-judge panel. “Nor do we find that the sentence was manifestly unfit.”
According to the ruling released this week, armed men broke into Munroe’s home, forced his family into the basement and during an altercation, shot his son. Munroe then wrestled the gun away from one of the intruders and shot him. As the men fled, the dad gave chase and as they took off in a car, he fired three more shots at them from his porch, not hitting anyone.
“When the police first interviewed Mr. Munroe, he lied and said that he did not have or use a gun,” Coroza wrote. “He subsequently told the police that he used the gun he wrestled from the intruders to shoot at them, saying that he tried to kill them and that, if given the chance, he would have killed them all.”
Acquitted of one charge last summer
Last summer, Ontario Court Justice Nathan N. Baker acquitted Munroe of charges related to shooting the armed intruder in his house, finding it was self-defence. But the judge ruled it was no longer self-defence when he opened fire on the fleeing men and convicted him of reckless discharge of a restricted or prohibited firearm. He also found him guilty of obstruction of a peace officer for lying in his initial police statement.
Munroe was facing a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for reckless discharge of a restricted or prohibited firearm, but the trial judge found it was unconstitutional if applied to the circumstances of this case. Baker gave Munroe a conditional sentence of two years less a day — with conditions that he must remain at home except for work and wear a GPS tracking device — followed by three years’ probation.
The Crown didn’t appeal the ruling on the unconstitutionality of the five-year mandatory minimum but did argue Munroe’s conditional sentence failed to satisfy the objectives of denunciation and deterrence and was “demonstrably unfit.”
The appeal panel disagreed.
Circumstances were exceptional
The trial judge recognized the seriousness of discharging a gun in a public place but also realized the circumstances here were exceptional, the court said.
“When Mr. Munroe shot at the intruders from his porch, he was no longer acting in self-defence but he was still acting in the heat of the moment after seeing his family under threat and his son shot. In addition, Mr. Munroe used a handgun he had wrestled from the intruders to protect his family; this was not a handgun he acquired unlawfully and brought to the scene,” Coroza wrote on behalf of the panel.
“Besides the circumstances of the offence, there were other significant mitigating factors, such as Mr. Munroe’s demonstrated remorse and extensive rehabilitative efforts, and that he had overcome a turbulent youth to become a dedicated father and a skilled worker with a stable job and income.”
In an emailed statement to the Sun , Munroe’s lawyer Mark Halfyard said his client won’t be commenting on the appeal decision.
“He and his family are trying to put this terrible ordeal behind them,” he said.
And thankfully, he can do it from home – and not a jail cell.