You are on page 1of 2

Bradley Aschenbrenner

West Shore, Victoria, BC

June 23, 2018

His or Her Honour the Presiding Judge


238 Government Street
Duncan, BC
V9L 1A5

Your Honour:

RE: Kenneth Jacob Fenton

Although I understand that the matter before you does not involve an offense that directly relates to
me, I am writing to you regarding the significant and lifelong impact that Mr. Fenton’s repeated
offenses have had. First I would like to address the emotional impact that his reckless actions have
had on my life and the lives of my two young children, which is outlined in the attached original
impact statement that I submitted to the Court during disposition on July 7, 2017 at the Western
Communities Courthouse. Nothing has changed for us since that time.

A primary reason that nothing has changed is that I am having difficulty moving on given the
ridiculously short sentence the offender was given for his previous offense, and feel that justice was
not served. Most importantly, on May 22, 2016, roughly 5 weeks following the offender killing
Constable Beckett, he was charged with another accident resulting in bodily harm, impaired driving
causing bodily harm, flight from police causing bodily harm or death, and a DUI. Unfortunately, the
matter that is now before you was not mentioned by Crown or Defense Council during the July 7
disposition and the omission is very possibly a reason that the offender’s sentence was only 4 years
to begin with.

As you are undoubtedly aware, the May 22, 2016 incident was unfathomably not the offender’s
second offense involving being intoxicated while driving, fleeing from police in the process, and/or
injuring or killing someone. Based on information from the July 7, 2017 Court documents, it was
at a minimum his fourth such incident (and these are only the incidents he was formally charged
with).

I am deeply concerned that if this repeat offender is given anything less than the maximum allowable
sentence it will send him a message that his behavior resulted in only a mild consequence and is
therefore somehow acceptable. A shorter sentence may also not prevent him from re-offending.
Indeed, it is reasonable to assume that the risk of recidivism in this instance is remarkably high.

An additional concern regarding risk of re-offending is the apparent severity of the offender’s alcohol
problem. During the July 7, 2017 trial the Court pointed out that his blood alcohol level was “270"
(.278 according to the public record) more than one hour after he killed Constable Beckett, and yet
there was no suggestion of any weaving or wandering in his lane. The Court further noted that
typically a person who is not a seasoned drinker would not be able to drive a car in a straight line
with readings in excess of 200, and that in fact a casual drinker would likely be “passed out or
slobbering drunk.” It is difficult to believe a problem this severe can be rehabilitated within a short
time frame.

Any outcome other than the maximum allowable sentence for this offender’s reckless actions would
also send a potentially dangerous and confusing message to Canadians: It is permissible to drive
while severely intoxicated, flee from police, kill an RCMP officer in the line of duty in the process,
and again get back behind the wheel while intoxicated afterwards.

Thank you for your consideration,


Bradley Aschenbrenner

You might also like