A judge sentenced a Quebec man to 13 years in prison on Monday for helping to kidnap a couple in their 70s from Upstate New York and hold them for ransom in connection with a botched multimillion-dollar cocaine deal.
Superior Court Justice Michel Pennou delivered his decision in a Montreal courtroom, adding that when time served is considered, Gary Arnold will have nine years, two months and six days remaining in his sentence.
“Considering the evidence as a whole, the court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt Mr. Arnold was involved from beginning to end in the planning and execution of the carried out kidnapping and extortion,” Pennou said.
The Crown sought a 17-year sentence for Arnold, who was arrested on Oct. 1, 2020, and found guilty by a jury in February of five charges, including kidnapping, extortion and conspiracy to kidnap.
Arnold’s trial heard he was part of a plot to abduct James and Sandra Helm of Moira, N.Y., in connection with what the Crown said was a drug deal gone bad. The four other co-accused were arrested on Sept. 29, 2020 — the same day a Quebec provincial police tactical unit rescued the Helms from a cottage in Quebec’s Eastern Townships. The other four accused were sentenced to between six and 15 years in prison.
The Crown argued the couple were kidnapped as leverage in a bid to recover 50 kilograms of cocaine, $3.5 million cash or their grandson, Mackenzie, who had been arrested in Vermont six days earlier with the drugs.
The Helms were taken from their home, smuggled into Canada through the Mohawk Territory of Akwesasne and held at a cottage in Magog, Que., for two days before police rescued them unharmed.
Pennou cited a number of aggravating factors that would justify a longer sentence, including the age and vulnerability of the victims, and the impact the traumatic events had on their health and daily lives. Arnold also had a criminal record related to smuggling contraband drugs and cigarettes, although none of his offences were violent.
However, the judge accepted that Arnold had been subjected to particularly harsh conditions in detention, which Pennou said should reduce the time the accused spends behind bars. Arnold, the judge said, was denied medication that had been prescribed to him for psoriasis, a painful skin condition.
The defence sought 10 years in prison for Arnold, who argued during his trial that he had acted under threats against his life and his family, did not know anything about a kidnap plot, had never met any member of the Helm family and denied being inside the couple’s home.
Arnold said he followed orders from a man named “Big” who instructed him to do various tasks such as transporting phones, sending text messages and picking up catheters Sandra Helm needed.
Pennou said that while it’s impossible to know why the jury reached its verdict, he described Arnold’s testimony as “generally not credible” and said it “left the court with a strong impression of pure fabrication.”
The judge said the testimony included “astonishing detail” about conversations that had supposedly occurred two years earlier, as well as “convenient and nonsensical” claims. While it’s “not implausible” Arnold had been under pressure to participate, Pennou said his testimony couldn’t be relied upon.
“Mr. Arnold has a very elaborate story to tell, but that’s all it was: a story,” he said.
Speaking after the sentencing, Crown prosecutor Kim Chaiken acknowledged the sentence fell short of what prosecutors had asked for, adding she would take time to read the judgment before deciding whether to appeal.
While James Helm has died, she said Sandra Helm has to live with the impact of the kidnapping, including ongoing fears for her safety. “She needs this episode to be done and finished and to take back her life,” Chaiken said outside the courtroom.
Defence lawyer John T. Pepper Jr. said the judge took his client’s denial of proper medical treatment into account. He said the absence of medication while in detention caused his client painful flare-ups that left his sheets bloodied.
“The judge took that into consideration and gave him what I think was a fair sentence,” Pepper Jr. said, noting that the principle of parity meant the judge had to impose a similar sentence to what the co-conspirators received.
“I believe that this sentence is a sentence which respects the criteria of law and will be difficult to appeal,” the lawyer added.
Comments