A former City of Ottawa lawyer who admitted to vandalizing the National Holocaust Monument will learn his fate in early January, following a court hearing this week.
Sentencing Delayed Until New Year
Superior Court Justice Anne London-Weinstein is scheduled to deliver her sentence on January 7. The date was set during a hearing where both Crown and defence lawyers agreed to reconvene in the new year. The accused, Iain Aspenlieder, remains in custody after making an unusual request to return to the Ottawa-Carleton Detention Centre.
Unusual Request to Return to Custody
During a sentencing hearing on Monday, Aspenlieder asked to be sent back to jail. His lawyer, Michael Spratt, explained that his client's strict bail conditions had created undue hardship for his family. Aspenlieder had been released on bail after pleading guilty on July 25. Spratt noted this was the first time a client of his had made such a request, which followed an in-depth discussion.
The Charges and Crown's Position
Aspenlieder was arrested on June 27 and faced charges of mischief to a war monument, mischief exceeding $5,000, and harassment by threatening conduct. The charges stem from an incident in the early hours of June 9, when he defaced the National Holocaust Monument at 1918 Chaudière Crossing with the words "FEED ME" in red paint.
Crown attorney Moiz Karimjee is seeking a two-year prison sentence, with credit for time already served, followed by three years of probation. Karimjee argued that Aspenlieder's actions harmed the Jewish community in Ottawa and across Canada by blaming them for the Israel-Palestinian conflict, causing widespread fear for safety.
"There are daily lawful protests in Ottawa and across Ontario with respect to Israel, and no one is prevented from criticizing Israel lawfully," Karimjee told the court. "This offence harmed the Jewish community and all Canadians because of a foreign conflict."
Defence Acknowledges Gravity of Crime
Defence lawyer Michael Spratt agreed his client deserves punishment and a criminal record. However, he contested the Crown's assertion that the crime was hate-motivated, arguing the prosecution had not proven that intent beyond a reasonable doubt.
"That sort of sentence reflects that he’s guilty, that jail is appropriate, that he should get a criminal record and there should be serious consequences," Spratt stated. He added, "There is no denying that the effects were completely inappropriate." He emphasized that the impact on the community was severe, regardless of the court's finding on motive.
The case has drawn significant attention, highlighting issues of vandalism to memorials and the impact of international conflicts on local communities in Canada.
