The incident resulted in some 38 or 39 (I can’t remember exactly) criminal charges against Jonny, a seventeen year old, ranging from attempted murder, to point firearm, to break and enter & others. He ended up pleading out to eleven charges in a plea bargain, he was sentenced to two years in custody, followed by a year of intense probation. Essentially under the old Young Offender’s Act, the most he could have been sentenced to was a three year sentence. Had he been sentenced to a longer gaol term there would have been no probation. The probation would allow (and require) him to get some of the psychiatric help that he so desperately needed.
One of the puzzling aspects was why he didn’t shoot at Bill and Joe in the van, or the other members when he arrived. My best guess was that he was out of ammunition. When he was arrested he had only one round left for the handgun, and it’s hard to have a gun battle with one bullet. He had hundreds of rounds of .22 ammunition, but no longer had a .22, since shooting at the tourists in Waden Bay.
He had been looking desperately for a rifle and the outcome would have been no doubt different had he found one. Shotguns and handguns are relatively close range weapons, and while it was risky not returning fire, the members at Mickey’s camp had decided that they could take that risk and not shoot back. Had he been shooting with a rifle, they no doubt would have shot him.
One of the most satisfying aspects of police work, for me anyway, is getting a suspect to talk to you and confess to what happened. I always enjoyed getting warned statements from suspects, and the challenge of them (a warned statement is one that you take from suspects, warning them that they don’t have to tell you anything and letting them know what their rights are. They must be done right or they won’t be allowed as evidence.). In Jonny’s case I was able to make a connection with him and obtained a seventeen page warned statement from him. I actually couldn’t get him to shut up once I got him going, and we even had to break for a meal. This one was particularly satisfying because he would open up to no one else about the incident, not his lawyer, nor the psychologists/psychiatrists he talked to later.
He had previously been convicted from another incident in Saskatoon resulting in multiple charges at a school. As far as I know, he did not get into any further trouble after completing his sentence.
Comments
One response
A good story with a good conclusion, thanks Clare.