A Calgary Court of King’s Bench judge has rejected a joint plea bargain for a woman involved in a grandparent fraud scheme, drawing praise for upholding principles over expediency. Justice Michele Hollins refused to accept the proposed two-year-less-a-day conditional sentence for Alana Love Duncan, 48, who pleaded guilty last fall to defrauding Calgary seniors.
Details of the Proposed Sentence
Crown prosecutor Don Couturier and defence counsel Mary Stephensen jointly recommended a conditional sentence that included 12 months of house arrest. The defence argued that Duncan’s crack cocaine addiction drove her actions, while the Crown cited challenges in proving the case due to victims’ ages and Duncan’s minor role in the scheme. Duncan also agreed to pay $18,000 in restitution out of the total $70,000 stolen from victims.
Judge’s Concerns
Despite these factors, Justice Hollins expressed reservations about a non-custodial punishment, noting that without individuals like Duncan—who personally met with seniors—the fraud scheme would fail. According to the judge, the facts Duncan admitted to were still egregious, as she preyed on vulnerable members of society. The court instructed both sides to provide further written submissions.
Implications for the Justice System
Plea bargains are a cornerstone of the judicial system, saving resources and sparing victims from testifying. However, this case highlights the delicate balance between efficiency and justice. As the Supreme Court advises, judges should be reluctant to reject joint submissions, but Hollins’ decision underscores that certain crimes warrant stricter scrutiny. Kevin Martin, a journalist covering the case, applauded the judge’s stance, stating, “It’s hard to blame Hollins for sticking to her principles.”
