Saskatchewan Crown Seeks Dismissal of Michael Gordon Jackson's Appeal
The Crown in Saskatchewan is urging the province's highest court to reject appeal arguments from Michael Gordon Jackson, a father convicted of abduction in contravention of a parenting order. A hearing is scheduled for early April, where lawyers from both sides are expected to present oral arguments in this contentious case.
Background of the Conviction
On April 19, 2024, a jury found Michael Gordon Jackson guilty of abduction after he took his then seven-year-old daughter on the run in an attempt to prevent her from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Jackson, a 57-year-old resident of Carievale, Saskatchewan, was charged with abduction occurring between December 6, 2021, and January 21, 2022. Police located Jackson and his daughter in Vernon, British Columbia, in late February 2022.
Jackson received a one-year sentence on December 6, 2024, but the custodial punishment was considered already served due to time spent on remand. He also received two years of probation as part of his sentencing.
Appeal Arguments and Crown Response
Jackson appealed both his conviction and sentence on the same day as his sentencing, arguing that the trial judge made errors and that he should receive a new trial or a reduced sentence. In response, Crown counsel Pouria Tabrizi-Reardigan filed a written argument, known as a factum, dated March 26, 2024.
The Crown's factum takes issue with Jackson's suggestion that the jury should have been allowed to consider the defense of necessity. Tabrizi-Reardigan wrote, "The defense of necessity does not ward off criminal responsibility whenever an accused professes fear or distrusts the institutions of justice." The Crown argues that the judge correctly found this defense lacked the required "air of reality" in Jackson's case, as it demands imminence, absence of lawful alternatives, and proportionality—none of which were satisfied here.
Furthermore, the Crown disputes Jackson's claim that the trial judge made mistakes regarding his sentence, should the conviction appeal fail. Jackson also argues that the judge failed to consider the 60-day sentence he received for contempt of court—related to his failure to return his daughter to her mother—when determining the abduction sentence.
Legal Proceedings and Implications
This case highlights significant legal issues surrounding parental rights, court orders, and public health concerns. Before his criminal trial, Jackson was found in contempt of court for violating a parenting order. The upcoming hearing in early April will be crucial in determining whether Jackson's appeal has merit or if the Crown's arguments for dismissal will prevail.
The Crown is formally asking the court to dismiss Jackson's conviction appeal, emphasizing that the defense of necessity is not applicable in this context. As both sides prepare for oral arguments, this case continues to draw attention to the intersection of family law, criminal justice, and public health debates.
