The judge’s reasons for sending Metron Construction’s project manager, Vadim Kazenelson, to jail for criminal negligence are now available here.
In our post of January 11th, we reported that the judge had sentenced Mr. Kazenelson to 3 1/2 years in prison.
Mr. Justice MacDonnell’s reasons for imposing the 3 1/2 jail term are as follows:
- Although Mr. Kazenelson was of “good character prior to the accident and has continued to be of good character in the six years since”, and he was remorseful and unlikely to commit further criminal offences of any kind, the offences and their consequences were very serious: four men lost their lives and a fifth suffered devastating and life-altering injuries.
- As the Crown and Mr. Kazenelson agreed, the principles of denunciation and general deterrence (sending a message to others, to prevent similar crimes in future) required a term of imprisonment.
- Mr. Kazenelson’s breach of duty was “more than a momentary lapse”. He was aware that the workers were working 100 feet or more above the ground without lifelines. “His duty to take steps to rectify this dangerous situation was fully engaged, and it remained engaged for some time” (he was with the workers for at least 30 minutes prior to the accident).
- He not only did nothing, he permitted all six workers to board the swing stage together with their tools.
- He did so in circumstances where he had no information with respect to the capacity of the swing stage to safely bear the weight of the workers and their tools.
- Mr. Kazenelson “adverted to the risk, weighed it against Metron’s interest in keeping the work going, and decided to take a chance. That is a seriously aggravating circumstance in relation to the moral blameworthiness of his conduct.” Mr. Kazenelson was aware that there was a deadline for completing the work and that his boss was intent on meeting it.
- “A consideration of all of the circumstances can lead only to the conclusion that a significant term of imprisonment is necessary to reflect the terrible consequences of the offences and to make it unequivocally clear that persons in positions of authority in potentially dangerous workplaces have a serious obligation to take all reasonable steps to ensure that those who arrive for work in the morning will make it safely back to their homes and families at the end of the day.”
In the end, Mr. Kazenelson, now a 40 year old father of three young sons, described as “honest, hardworking, conscientious and safety-minded”, “a good and devoted father to his children” and “unquestionably a person of good character” who was providing support to his mother who resides overseas, was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison. Mr. Kazenelson has appealed his conviction for criminal negligence, so it would appear that the case is not over yet.
R. v Vadim Kazenelson, 2016 ONSC 25 (CanLII)