Friday marked the final day in B.C. Supreme Court in Chilliwack for submissions on the evidence by Crown and defence lawyers in the manslaughter sentencing of Owen Charpentier.
Charpentier pleaded guilty in 2020 to manslaughter with a firearm in the October 21, 2019 death of Keith Baldwin at the car wash on Yale Road at Fletcher Street.
The five days spent in court June 13 to 17 were for a Gardiner hearing, which is held when an offender has been convicted but Crown and defence disagree on the circumstances of the crime.
One of the main points of contention between Crown and defence was what happened at the moment of the shooting. Security footage from different vantage points captured the area of the shooting, and the figures involved, cloaked mostly in darkness.
One of the central questions was whether Baldwin was backing away, or taking a step forward, as Charpentier fired the sawed-off .22 rifle hitting Baldwin on the side of the forehead.
鈥淚 say Mr. Baldwin was retreating when Mr. Charpentier fired the gun,鈥� said Crown Counsel Henry Waldock, in presenting aggravating factors including the use of the 鈥渘asty鈥� or prohibited weapon.
The security video does show a figure move backward.
鈥淗e scared Mr. Baldwin into retreating, and while he was retreating Mr. Charpentier shot the gun. It wasn鈥檛 self protection, Crown asserted but instead was an aggressive, 鈥業鈥檓 in charge鈥� type of move toward him.鈥�
Defence counsel Simon Buck argued that Charpentier had in fact fired the rifle as a 鈥渨arning shot鈥� to scare Baldwin off as he took a step toward Charpentier.
It was defence鈥檚 contention that Baldwin was shot after he sprayed bear spray into the car wash bay, and had stepped back to avoid the effects of the spray. Charpentier鈥檚 purpose in shooting the rifle therefore was to protect himself, with no intent of hitting Baldwin, Buck said.
鈥淭here can be no doubt Mr. Baldwin approached Mr. Charpentier with violence in mind,鈥� Buck said, noting Baldwin had snuck up to the car wash bay in a stealthy manner.
鈥淲hy approach that way?鈥� he asked. 鈥淏ecause he knows his prey is there.鈥�
There was no evidence then that Charpentier was seeking conflict but in fact he had been trying to avoid Baldwin and the conflict, Buck stated.
Defence pointed out that that Charpentier had raised the firearm to 鈥渨aist level鈥� to shoot, and not at eye level, 鈥渨hich is what you would do if you were trying to hit a target.鈥�
The distance of the shot, estimated at 40 feet, was a 鈥渓ong distance鈥� to fire, which was an indication of just how much of an 鈥渦naimed shot鈥� it was.
But Crown argued there was 鈥渘o specific intention to miss鈥� Baldwin when Charpentier pulled out the rifle and shot him.
The exact spot where Baldwin was shot was another factor in dispute. Crown said Baldwin fell where he was shot near the car wash vacuum, but defence suggested he did not fall right away but rather stumbled across the length of the bay and then fell near the vacuum stand.
Waldock characterized Charpentier as someone who would place blame on everyone else but on himself, and suggested getting the gun in the first place was an attempt by Charpentier establish his reputation as 鈥渢he tough guy鈥� in charge.
Waldock suggested Charpentier wanted the court to believe he was the victim of 鈥渦nending bad luck.鈥�
The dispute between the two men was described as having started after Charpentier broke into Baldwin鈥檚 car, which led to Baldwin beating on Charpentier with his fists, and a wrench.
Crown said Charpentier aggravated the dispute that led to the shooting by bear-spraying Baldwin in the face at the Newmark apartment stairwell two weeks prior to the shooting, and had prepared for violence by getting the gun.
It was suggested that Baldwin had believed Charpentier was the one who damaged the ignition column of his car, and had told one of the witnesses that, and wanted to be paid for the damage but Charpentier denied he was the one that did the damage.
Charpentier鈥檚 sentencing hearing is not yet complete and was put over to Aug. 11 and 12. He is facing anywhere from four years, the mandatory minimum, to as much as nine or 10 years sought by Crown.
RELATED:
RELATED:
RELATED:
Do you have a story idea to share? Email:
jfeinberg@theprogress.com
Like us on and follow us on .
