Lawyers for two men convicted for their role in the murder of four Mounties are arguing in the Alberta Court of Appeal that their clients were the subject of "savage and vengeful" prison sentences.
Dennis Cheeseman and Shawn Hennessey were acting in terror of killer James Roszko the night that they gave him a ride to his fatal rendezvous with police and don't deserve their respective sentences of 12 and 15 years, the lawyers said Wednesday.
"Twelve years is a savage and vengeful sentence which is unfit on its face," said Peter Royal, who is acting for Cheeseman.
Hennessey's lawyer, Hersh Wolch, agreed.
"My client is a decent, good young man," he said. "One night, his choices were bad under duress and intimidation. It doesn't call for 15 years."
Both men pleaded guilty to manslaughter for helping James Roszko before he shot the four officers on March 3, 2005, near Mayerthorpe, Alta. They gave Mr. Roszko a rifle and a ride to the edge of his farm where officers were guarding a marijuana grow operation and chop shop until investigators arrived. He had shown up at Hennessey's house earlier in the day.
Court heard that Mr. Roszko had had run-ins with the law for years and was particularly angry with the RCMP that night.
A few hours later, Mr. Roszko gunned down Brock Myrol, 29; Anthony Gordon, 28; Leo Johnston, 32; and Peter Schiemann, 25. Only Johnston managed to get a shot away. Roszko then killed himself after being wounded in a shootout with another officer.
According to a statement of facts, Mr. Hennessey, 30, said he helped Mr. Roszko because he was part of the marijuana grow-op. Mr. Cheeseman, 26, helped because he was Hennessey's brother-in-law.
Mr. Royal argued that Mr. Cheeseman was a bystander under the sway of his brother-in-law.
"He was going along with his brother-in-law, helping out his brother-in-law," Royal told the panel of three judges before a full and attentive court. "Cheeseman is a man of weak personality."
Mr. Royal pointed out it was Mr. Cheeseman who suggested, after they had dropped off the heavily armed and camouflaged Mr. Roszko in the early-morning dark, that they call police and warn them. Hennessey overruled the suggestion.
Mr. Royal suggested that a sentence of six to eight years would be more appropriate.
Mr. Wolch suggested the original judge allowed his revulsion for Mr. Roszko's crime to influence sentencing. He noted that the judge had to call a break during the trial as victim impact statements were read out in order to compose himself.
The judge ruled Hennessey was acting out of self-interest because he was trying to cover up his role selling marijuana grown by Mr. Roszko. In reality, said Mr. Wolch, Mr. Hennessey just wanted Mr. Roszko out of his house and away from his family.
"Fear is fear," the lawyer said. "Retribution was expected. This was a man with a young family."
Justice Peter Martin asked why Hennessey didn't want to call police during the hours before the shootings when Roszko was stalking the doomed officers.
"Mr. Cheeseman said, 'Let's do this' and Mr. Hennessey said, 'No,' and as a consequence, four men died.
"How far does cowardice take us? Cowardice is not a defence."
Mr. Wolch argued 15 years is out of proportion to Mr. Hennessey's guilt.
"Nobody takes away from the tragedy but the sentence is disproportionate," he said.
The Crown was expected to make its arguments later Wednesday.