Supreme Court will not hear PQ election rally shooter's appeal - Action News
Home WebMail Friday, November 22, 2024, 04:53 PM | Calgary | -10.8°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
Montreal

Supreme Court will not hear PQ election rally shooter's appeal

The Supreme Court of Canada will not hear an appeal from Richard Henry Bain, a 69-year-old Quebec man who wasconvicted of second-degree-murder in connection with the Parti Qubcois election night victory rally in 2012.

Richard Bain wanted the court to hear the appeal of his life sentence with no chance of parole for 20 years

This still image of Richard Bain was taken from video, filmed by Martin Bouffard after the election night shooting in 2012. (CBC)

The Supreme Court of Canada will not hear an appeal from Richard Henry Bain, the country's topcourt announced Thursday.

The 69-year-old Quebec man wasconvicted of second-degree-murder in connection with a shooting duringthe Parti Qubcois election night victory rally in 2012.

Bain was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 20 years in November 2016 for killing Denis-Blanchette, a 48-year-old stagehandoutside the Metropolis nightclub in downtown Montreal.

Bain injured one other person when he opened fire with a semi-automatic rifle. Hewas also convicted of three counts of attempted murder.

He wanted the Supreme Court to hear an appeal of hissentence, but the top court said it will not hear his appeal.

20 years is too long, lawyer says

Bain's lawyer, Alan Guttman, saidin June that he believes 20 years is too long and that 15 years or less would be more appropriate.

Bain would be 83 when he gets his first chance at parole and "for a man at his age, in these circumstances, there's a good chance he won't make it," Guttman said at the time.

According to the Supreme Court's summary of the case, Bainargued that the trial judge's failure to ask the jury for their recommendation on the appropriate parole ineligibility period constituted a "serious legal error which warranted the court's intervention."

The Court of Appeal had also dismissed the appeal in March. In that case, three of the fivejudges said it was an error in good faith.

The other two judges on the panel acknowledgedthe error was seriousbut not serious enough to change Bain's period of parole eligibility.