Crown appeals judge’s decision to release guns
Killer wants firearms sold so he can collect cash when he gets out of prison
REGINA The Crown is seeking leave to appeal a judge’s order granting the release of all John Strang ’s firearms with the exception of the one used in the murder of his wife.
John Strang previously pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in the August 2015 shooting of Lisa Strang — director of finance for the Saskatchewan Party — as well as a charge of threatening a female acquaintance. He received a life sentence with no parole eligibility for 17 years.
While Crown and defence lawyers agreed on the overall sentence, they diverged when it came to the issue of what should be done with the various firearms seized from Strang’s vehicle at the time of his arrest.
Defence lawyer Brian Smith argued the guns were not used in the commission of an offence, meaning they weren’t subject to forfeiture — a position with which Justice Ellen Gunn ultimately agreed.
But Crown prosecutor Kelly Kaip argued the fact that Strang was driving around with those and other weapons should be of great concern, given the circumstances not only of the murder, but of an ominous visit he paid to a female acquaintance following the shooting. Court heard he told the woman he’d once fantasized about raping and killing her and murdering others — lending the items found in the Jeep “a nefarious tone,” Kaip argued.
Gunn noted Strang didn’t point out the existence of the firearms in his vehicle during the conversation with the acquaintance and so did not, by law, “use” the firearms while committing the uttering threats offence. Gunn referenced case law and a Parliamentary expansion of the law that means an accused must have done something, whether actively or inactively, with a firearm for a court to deem it had been used in the commission of an offence.
Gunn said the guns remained in the Jeep during Strang’s threatening exchange with the acquaintance, adding no reference was made to the firearms in the course of his threats.
“Having firearms proximate for future use is not enough,” Gunn ruled.
“The ‘other firearms’ may have been proximate and therefore would have affected Mr. Strang’s ability to carry out his threats, but, as established by the Supreme Court, this line of inquiry is irrelevant to the offence of uttering threats,” her decision went on to read.
Outside of court, Smith reminded reporters that, regardless of the judge’s findings, his client is now prohibited for life from ever owning, possessing or using firearms. The plan for the guns, he said, is simply to have them go to a third party who could sell them on Strang ’s behalf, since he’ll have limited financial resources upon his release from prison.
The Crown filed an appeal of the forfeiture portion of Gunn’s decision late last week. In it, the Crown claims the judge erred by failing to order the forfeiture of all guns seized from Strang, and by ordering all guns except the murder weapon be turned over, on Strang ’s written authorization, to a person legally entitled to possess them.