HALIFAX – The stage is set for what could be a precedent setting decision in Canada.
The lawyer for a Halifax man charged with mistakenly killing his son is challenging the countries mandatory minimum sentences for firearms offences.
Michael Dockrill, 56, was convicted in April in the fatal shooting of his own son four years ago.
READ MORE: Michael Dockrill, charged with killing son in home invasion, to be sentenced this week
Two masked men broke into the Dockrill home in June of 2011, in what’s been described as an attempted drug rip. During an altercation, Michael Dockrill shot his son Jason Dockrill, instead of the intruder.
“He was trying to defend his property. The jury convicted him of criminal negligence causing death, which was not taking a step to call out or turn on the lights or call the police,” said Brian Church, defence lawyer.
Because a gun was used, Dockrill is facing a mandatory minimum jail sentence of four years in prison.
The Crown attorney says Michael knew his son was selling drugs. In fact, the court heard Jason actually gave his father the gun used in the shooting a few days before the incident, after he had been threatened.
The defence is asking the judge to consider a suspended sentence, where Dockrill could speak to others about the dangers of guns.
“He’s in a prison of grief,” Church said.
Crown wants five to seven years
The Crown says Michael Dockrill intended to shoot someone that night and want to send him to prison for five to seven years.
“The fact that this was an intentional shooting played into that, but all the other circumstances that led up to this…It wasn’t sort of a momentary, accidental, involving alcohol situation,” said Tanya Carter, Crown attorney.
Dockrill’s lawyer doesn’t believe his client should have ever been found guilty and says he is already serving a life sentence for mistakenly killing his child.
“The accused is suffering greatly, feels guilty all the time,” said Church.
Neither the Crown or the defence could find a similar case in Canada. A case that’s complicated even more by the fact the accused and the victim are father and son.
“It adds an extra layer of seriousness cause it highlights that the wrong person was shot. So, when your talking about intentional shootings and then the negligence piece in this, which was a huge factor, shooting the wrong person is certainly a huge concern,” said Carter.
A judge will review the arguments and will decide on a sentence when the case returns to court on February 26th.
- What is a halal mortgage? How interest-free home financing works in Canada
- Capital gains changes are ‘really fair,’ Freeland says, as doctors cry foul
- Ontario doctors offer solutions to help address shortage of family physicians
- Budget 2024 failed to spark ‘political reboot’ for Liberals, polling suggests
Comments