Justin Jennings convicted of extortion

Defence lawyer had argued Jennings believed he was collecting a legitimate debt

There was no weapon, no violence and no direct threat of harm, but Justin Jennings' intent to extort money from a man when he showed up at his home this past spring was clear, a judge ruled Wednesday.

Jennings, 34, had pleaded not guilty to an extortion charge and two charges of breaching court orders that were laid by police after he visited a Mount Pearl man at home May 27. In a conversation with the man on his front deck — which was recorded by a doorbell camera and shown in court — Jennings told the man he had been sent to collect a $37,000 debt for someone else, but he didn't know what it was for. He suggested the man pay a third of the money right away, or things would "get worse." If he couldn't pay with money, Jennings told him, he'd have to pay with something else.

The man told Jennings he didn't have a debt and didn't know what he was talking about, suggesting it was his friend Johnny who owed the money instead.

The man testified he had felt intimidated by Jennings and afraid of him, and feared violence. When Jennings left, telling the man to sort things out with his friend and meet him in an hour, the man contacted police.

"His fear and concern was for good reason," Judge Mark Pike said Wednesday morning. "The accused made it clear that he was there, sent by another person, to collect $37,000 and insisted that it be paid immediately." Jennings stressed that he wasn't joking, the judge noted. The two other men waiting in the vehicle in which Jennings' had arrived at the residence had added to the intimidation, the judge said.

An extortion conviction requires proof that a person, without a reasonable excuse, used threats, menaces, accusations or violence to induce someone to do something.

"To menace is to threaten and to threaten is to express an intention to harm," Pike said. "It's clear to me that this is exactly what Jennings did on the day in question. To induce is to persuade or to bring about something. In this case it was clearly an attempt to obtain money."

Jennings' actions went beyond what a reasonable person would consider a legitimate means to collect a debt, the judge said. He convicted Jennings of the three charges.

Jennings' lawyer, Averill Baker, had made an application to have the video tossed from evidence, on the grounds that they had been submitted to police by the complainant in a series of clips, with some missing seconds of conversation between them. She argued Jennings had believed he was collecting a legitimate debt, and pointed out he had made no explicit threats of violence. She also pointed to issues with the complainant's credibility.

Prosecutor Jude Hall argued an explicit threat wasn't necessary to make a person feel intimidated There was no other way to take Jennings' comments, Hall said.

Jennings will return to court Sept. 18 for a sentencing hearing.

Jennings had been acquitted of unrelated charges of extortion, kidnapping and robbery last April, after another provincial court judge ruled the complainant in the case had lied on the witness stand.