Accomplice to appeal
The three men convicted in the 2006 stabbing death of 24-year-old
Glen Monkman, 39, was convicted by a jury last month of second-degree murder for fatally stabbing Huynh outside the former
Justice Brenda Keyser sentenced all three to jail time Monday.
Monkman was handed an automatic life sentence, as are all offenders convicted of murder. He will not be eligible for parole for 12 years, which is part way between the Crown’s suggestion of 15 and the defence’s preference of the minimum 10. Keyser heard the sentencing arguments earlier this month.
Tavares was given a seven-year sentence, minus two years for time served, leaving five to go.
Tavares told the gallery as he was leaving court Monday that he hopes to appeal. He did not say whether he intends to appeal his conviction or his sentence.
During the trial earlier this year, court heard the accused believed Huynh had previously stabbed Tavares at a wedding social.
Tavares’ cousin Danny Simao testified the men had plotted to go to Club Desire and attack Huynh when they learned he was there the night of the fatal stabbing. Jurors heard evidence Huynh was on steroids and high on cocaine when he started picking fights with several people outside the nightclub, including a man believed to be
The 24-year-old later died from his wounds.
I am definitely seeing some bias in this article. First of all, the title says "accomplice to appeal," when it should say "alleged." Just because a jury convicted this man, does make him 100% guilty as I feel that the Crown did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Second, "for their roles in the crime," also implies that these men definitely HAD roles in the crime, when they may not have. Again, just because 12 people "agree" that they did, does not mean it's 100% true.
This article only states the Crown's opinion that these men were "encouraging and assisting Monkman." Nowhere, does it state what the Defence lawyers argued, which is also important information, in order for a reader to make an informed opinion.
Three sentenced in stabbing death
Three men were convicted of killing a
Glen Monkman, 39, was given a mandatory life sentence with no chance of parole for at least 12 years after being found guilty by a jury last month of second-degree murder.
Carlos Tavares, 31, received five years in prison in addition to one year of time already spent in custody. Norris Ponce, 31, was given two years in jail, in addition to one year of time served. Both men were convicted of manslaughter.
All three accused had originally been charged with first-degree murder.
Ming Hong Huynh, 24, was knifed outside Club Desire on
Monkman admitted stabbing Huynh four times in the chest and cheek with a small knife while horrified bystanders watched, but claimed he should only be found guilty of manslaughter based on the fact he was provoked.
The key issue at trial was whether the jury believed the testimony of the Crown's star witness, Danny Simao, who claims he overheard a plan to kill Huynh while inside a car with the three accused. Defence lawyers argued at trial that Simao was a proven liar.
The Crown argued the accused planned the attack as revenge for another stabbing that happened at a wedding social in March 2006.
Before the attack, court heard Huynh was wandering around shirtless outside the club. His girlfriend, Angie Pfeifer, testified Huynh used steroids and cocaine. The
The headline is biased in this article. It says "three sentenced in stabbing death" which implies that all three men were involved in the death, when really, that may not be the case.
It also does elaborate on the contradictions and inconsistencies in Simao's testimony and only presents the Crown's opinion.
In the beginning it says, ".. the their roles in the 2006 attack" which also implies that they are all guilty of playing a role, when that may not be true. Just because a jury convicts, does make it a definite fact. That is the author's opinion that they all played a role.