Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Judgment on the case







Counsel for the Crown:                                                                          R. Richardson and M. Giri
Counsel for the Defendants:                              T. Marino for A. Huber; D.J. Marion for R. Rodgers;
E. Chesterley for D. White
Place of Hearing:                                                                                                Courtenay, B.C.
Date of Hearing:                                                                       May 25, 26, 27 and June 28, 2010
Date of Judgment:                                                                                                   July 29, 2010

[1]        On a soft summer evening, in the beautiful Comox Valley, a very ugly incident took place. Three young white men, fuelled by alcohol and testosterone and their own immaturity, crossed paths with a black man and lives changed forever. The acid fog of racism permeates this case.
[2]        Adam David Huber, Robert William Roy Rodgers and David Samuel White are charged on Information 36042-1; on or about the 3rd day of July, 2009, at or near Courtenay, in the Province of British Columbia, did commit assault of another person, Jason Eli Phillips, contrary to Section 266 of the Criminal Code.
[3]        All 3 plead not guilty. Trial was held before me on the 25thand 26th of May 2010 and submissions were heard on June 28, 2010, Judgement was reserved to this date.
[4]        A common assault charge rarely makes the local media, let alone receives international attention.  However, this case has become infamous because part of the incident was captured on video, immediately uploaded to Youtube, and went viral. But the Youtube segment is misleading. To view it out of context is akin to walking into the middle of a movie. At that stage, characters have already formed, the storyline established, and the plot well along.  So it is in the case at Bar.
[5]        To understand what really happened, it is necessary to go back to the beginning. The 3 accused spent a warm summer’s day tubing down a local river. How much each of them had to drink is uncertain but it is certain they had been drinking.  At the end of they day they decided to go to the local McDonald’s for burgers. The 3 accused were ferried there by a 4th individual who had the good sense not to become involved in what transpired next.
[6]        Mr. Huber and his wife owned a roofing business and it was the company truck, an older model red pickup, in which they were riding. Mr. Huber and Mr. Rodgers were inside the cab of the truck. Mr. White rode in the bed. After obtaining their food they exited the drive-thru. Mr. Phillips was standing nearby speaking with a friend. Mr. White, for reasons known only to himself, hurled a racial epithet at Mr. Phillips involving what has euphemistically been called throughout the trial as the ‘N’ word. As the truck was passing Mr. Phillips, Mr. White said; “There’s a nigger.” Mr. Phillips responded “Fuck you”, and threw his water bottle toward the truck.  Mr. White then said “Fuck you, you fucking nigger, we are going to come back and kill you and your family.”  What Mr. White said was ugly, racist, and provoking. It is not surprising, then, that Mr. Phillips reacted  by throwing a water bottle at the receding truck. It is not surprising, either, that he was enraged.  Mr. Phillips was so blinded by rage, he saw a Confederate Flag in the back window of the pickup truck that simply was not there.
[7]        Mr. Phillips lived across the street from the McDonald’s. He was on his way to his local gym for a workout, wearing gym strip and carrying a water bottle.  Just as he was about to get into his car, he spotted a young man on a bicycle he had not seen in some time. He walked across the street to say hello. It was while he was chatting to the young man, that the truck crossed his path.
[8]        There was much speculation by defense counsel that Mr. Phillips, who has a history of substance abuse and who once committed a robbery to support a drug habit, was engaged in a drug deal.  The actions of Mr. Phillips subsequent to the assault were very strange indeed but the speculation that he was dealing remains.  I want to emphasize, just that – speculation.  In the end, it does not matter one way or the other to the issue at hand – except to note that Mr. Huber when confronting Mr. Phillips thought he was high on something. I think he was just in a rage.
[9]        As I have observed in other cases, it has been my experience that the collective IQ of young men, filled with testosterone and alcohol, declines with the numbers involved. In relation to the 3 accused, that certainly proved to be the case.  Mr. White, after shouting racist remarks to Mr. Phillips observed that Mr. Phillips threw something at the truck.  He thought it was a burger or a wrap.  He reported this to his friends in the cab of the truck.  It is evident that some discussion ensued about what to do about such effrontery because the truck did not immediately turn around but went at least two blocks before the decision was made to return and confront Mr. Phillips.
[10]      Mr.  Phillips watched as the truck departed, saw it turn, and crossed the street and waited for a confrontation.
[11]      What happened next, the key to understanding how verbal exchanges between pumped up young men became physical, is a matter of some dispute.
[12]      Mr. Huber confronted Mr. Phillips and demanded to know why Mr. Phillips threw something at his truck.  Because, said Mr. Phillips; “One of you called me a nigger.”  Mr. Huber unable to walk a mile in the shoes of Mr. Phillips, let alone stand in them for even one moment, repeated the question several times.  One would think this truck was a Faberge Egg, the way Mr. Huber went on and on about an item thrown at his truck.
[13]      Mr. Phillips said the ensuing fight was not consensual.  At least on some occasions he said that, on other occasions he said something quite different.  Mr. Phillips said many things, not all of them consistent.  At trial, it was abundantly evident that Mr. Phillips was still very angry, to such an extent that it affected his testimony.
[14]      Fortunately, there is an independent witness.  A Mr. Cossette was passing by and observed key events before they were picked up by the video camera.  Mr. Cossette was going to the PetroCan at Cliffe and 17th.  His route took him north on England Avenue and he intended to walk east on 18th.  At that point he observed 3 white men, their backs to him, facing Mr. Phillips.  He heard Phillips say; “Wanna go? Let’s go.” He then saw Mr. Phillips shove one of the white males.  That was Mr. Huber. According to Mr. Cossette, Mr. Phillips ‘clothes-lined’ Mr. Huber and sent him to the ground.  Mr. Cossette, who does not know any of these people, said he heard no racial epithets but did describe Mr. Phillips as very loud and the three white men as “hesitant.”
[15]      Mr. Phillips said the three accused exited the truck and began to trash talk; “This is a white town.  We are going to lynch you.”  Mr. Cossette heard none of that. According to Mr. Phillips the accused kept calling him a ‘nigger’.  If true, and Mr. Phillips was not enraged before, and most certainly he was, he was to the point of being irrational when the confrontation started.  Mr. Phillips described what we all saw on the video but he is rather vague about what happened before the action was caught on camera.  In direct examination, Mr. Phillips said; “I did not want to fight them. I never challenged any of them to fight.”  That is simply not true.  In fact, Mr. Phillips told a police officer, immediately after the event, that he agreed to fight the three accused, that he’d had enough [meaning, generally, that he had enough of racial slurs in his life] and that he was, in effect, taking a stand on this occasion. He said; “I fought those guys for all the other black guys in Courtenay.”  The evidence, in that regard, is consistent with that of the independent witness, Mr. Cossette.
[16]      During Mr. Marion’s cross, Mr. Phillips denied telling police that he said to the 3 accused; “If you want to go, let’s go.”  He denied telling Cst. Downey that he challenged the 3 accused to a fight.  Eventually, he conceded that it was possible that he did say those things and did challenge all 3 to fight.
[17]      Mr. Phillips went further.  He said that he was unafraid of the 3 accused, he just did not know if he could handle all 3 of them at once.  He was, I observe, considering the provocation of taunts and racial slurs, just angry enough to try.  Mr. Phillips said he was contemptuous of the 3 accused and laughed at them.
[18]      The video of the confrontation speaks for itself in the limited sense that it accurately portrays what happened after Mr. Phillips invited the fight.  For a moment or two the accused got the better of Mr. Phillips but he jumped up and went right after Mr. Huber at the passenger door of the truck.  Mr. Huber, at that time, was attempting to flee the scene with his co-accused.  Mr. Phillips, even after being on the ground and temporarily vanquished continued to yell “come on, come” and shouting that they were all dead.
[19]      Given the evidence of Mr. Cossette, and indeed the evidence of the complainant himself, I conclude that the fight between Mr. Phillips and the 3 accused was consensual.  As I said, Mr. Phillips was angry to the point of being entirely irrational.  It is not much of a reach to conclude that in his, quite understandable, blind rage he wanted to strike out and entirely willing to take on all of his tormentors.
[20]      The consent here was not one sided.  Clearly the 3 accused were prepared to accept  Mr. Phillips’ challenge and fight him as a trio.  Mr. White provoked Mr. Phillips from the outset and continued to do so throughout the altercation.  Mr. Huber and Mr. Rodgers refrained from uttering racial slurs but were willing participants in the fight.
[21]      The fact that the fight was consensual does not end the matter.  A consensual fist-fight between, in this case, among adults is not necessarily fought under Marquis of Queensbury Rules but there is, nonetheless, always a question of vitiation.  Vitiation may destroy or impair the legal validity of consent.  The question here, to put it plainly, is; Did the accused take any action during the course of the fight that vitiated consent?
[22]      The leading case on this matter is R. v. Jobidon [1991] S.C.R. 714, in which the limits of consent are discussed.  Very violent force, that causes serious hurt or non-trivial bodily harm, is not recognized as conduct to which one can validly consent.  The bodily harm contemplated is essentially that found in s.267 [2] of the Criminal Code.
[23]      In British Columbia, it has long been settled law, starting with R. v. Dixon [1988] 42 CCC [3d] 318 [BCCA] that bodily harm is caused when the hurt or injury is beyond transient or trifling in nature.
[24]      The questions for the Court are, therefore:
1.      Did the actions of the accused go beyond what was, in effect, a consensual fist-fight?
2.      If so, what were those actions?
3.      Finally, did Mr. Phillips sustain bodily harm as result of those actions thus vitiating consent?
[25]      The answer to the first question is; “Yes”.  The actions of two of the three accused did go beyond a consensual fist-fight.
[26]      The answer to the second question is; “Kicking”.  Mr. Phillips was kicked at least five times; twice by Mr. White and at least three times by Mr. Rodgers, who applied two of those kicks to the rib area after Mr. Phillips had been knocked down and while, for a moment, he was practically helpless. 
[27]      The answer to the last question is; “Yes”.
[28]      Mr. Phillips sustained two injuries that fit within the definition of bodily harm.  He sustained a cut near his eye that required a couple of stitches.  However, it is impossible to ascertain when exactly in the sequence of events he received that cut.  It might well have happened as Mr. Huber tried to quit the fight and while Mr. Huber was trying to get into his truck to leave.  Mr. Phillips rushed at Mr. Huber clearly wanting to continue the altercation and it appears he was struck by Mr. Huber.  It is likely the injury Mr. Phillips sustained, necessitating stitches, was caused at that time.  That punch thrown by Mr. Huber might well come under the rubric of self-defense, or a continuation of the consensual fist-fight, and I need not consider it further.
[29]      The second injury sustained by Mr. Phillips was to his ribs.  I find this injury caused by Mr. Rodgers who can clearly be seen vigorously applying his shod feet to the rib area of Mr. Phillips.
[30]      Mr. Phillips testified that he had sore ribs for approximately two months. Photographs were filed that showed bruising.  Clearly, that injury comes within theCriminal Code definition of bodily harm and R. v. Dixon cited above.  This is important because, while these accused are not charged with assault causing bodily harm, causing such harm in a consensual fight vitiates consent.
[31]      In R. v. DeCoste [2008] N.S.J No. 410, the Court said at paragraph 26 :
“While the court should discourage fights it is clear that a person can consent to the application of force by another and until a finding is made that the accused intended to cause bodily harm that consent permits punches to the head. Most fights involve an attempt to strike the other person in the head. That should be expected when one consents to a fist-fight.”
[32]      What is not expected in such a consensual fist-fight is that an individual will resort to kicking, the current popularity of MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) notwithstanding.  Mr. Phillips clearly did not resort to that tactic but two of the accused did exactly that.  It is not an unreasonable inference that a person engaged in an altercation, such as the one under discussion, who resorts to such methods intends bodily harm.  I find the kicking was intended to cause bodily harm and, in fact, did so.
[33]      My finding is that, initially, despite a 3 on 1 confrontation this was a consensual fist-fight.  Two of the accused resorted to kicking.  The kicks applied to Mr. Phillips while he was on the ground were beyond the consensual nature of the fight.  They were applied with force and I infer they were intended to cause, and did in fact cause, bodily harm.  Consent, therefore, was vitiated.
[34]      I expect that 3 on 1 consensual fist-fights are not common.  One of the risks participants assume in such an altercation is that one of their number will do something that vitiates consent.  In this case it was Mr. Rodgers who resorted to kicking causing bodily harm.  All 3 individuals become party to the offence and, therefore, all 3 are found guilty of common assault.

The Honourable Judge P. Doherty

Friday, July 20, 2012

Huber Wanted by Police for Failing to Appear in Court

UPDATE: He is not listed on the Comox Valley Crimestoppers' Mugshots page anymore

Huber is wanted today by the RCMP for failing to appear in court. If you have any information to his whereabouts, call the Comox Valley RCMP at 338-1321, or Comox Valley Crimestoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS. Read More: Comox Valley Crimestoppers 

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Sentencing of the Trio

Maximum sentence was 6 months in jail for the trio, but in the end they got:
  • Rob Rogers - Fined $500 and 8 months probation

  • Adam Huber - One day in jail and 12 months probation. He must also go into treatment for his alcohol problem.

  • David White - A conditional 30 day sentence where he will be put on a curfew, community service, AND ordered to undergo psychological counselling. White talked with the media afterwards. See the video from CTV News for his comments below.

Friday, December 17, 2010

1st Day of Sentencing

Confederate Flag: Association to American History or Active Support for Racism?

During the trial, all three were found guilty of assault. Crown prosecutor Robert Richardson was able to get section 718.2 of the criminal code applied to David White's sentencing. This would allow the court to consider racial prejudice or bias as an aggravation to the assault. Although, I might agree to label it a hate crime should be reserved for more heinous acts and displays of racism, White should receive a heavier sentence for his racist outburst towards a stranger on the street.

Eric Chesterley, White's lawyer, claimed that his client is not a racist. Racist or not, White did say a horrible thing towards Jay Phillips from the back of the pickup truck. It was discovered through court proceedings that White, without provocation, yelled "There's a nigger" within earshot of Phillips, a black man himself. No one should be subject to that kind of racial and verbal abuse. He may not be racist in the true sense as claimed by Eric Chesterley, but we do know he doesn't have respect for black people he if he fragrantly uses the N-word in public like that

I don't think racial jokes, insults, discrimination, and abuse will decrease from the publicity of this case. Jokes will still be said behind people's backs. Minorities will still be distanced and isolated from certain social groups. And people will still be harassed on the street for being a different race in the Comox Valley. But hopefully, we'll learn that if you single someone out based on the colour of their skin and assault them physically or verbally, there will be consequences.

Oblivious to most people of the Comox Valley, a racist subculture that celebrate the history and culture of the American deep south is brewing in the Valley. Everytime you see a confederate flag on a vehicle or piece of clothing, ask yourself what you think that person is celebrating by displaying it? More than likely, they're celebrating and representing the racist redneck subculture prevalent in the Southern United States.

Read More:

Judge delays sentencing on YouTube case‎
Dec 17th, 2010 - Comox Valley Echo
No decision‎
Dec 16th, 2010 - Comox Valley Record

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Crown Presents Facebook Photos

Crown prosecutor presented pictures taken from Facebook that may suggest that David White revel in and celebrated racist culture. These photos may also suggest that his verbal attack was racially motivated as well.

There was as hearing between all lawyers to determine whether the photo are admissible in court. However, Judge Peter Doherty will determine the evidence's admissibility at a later date.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Trouble in Campbell River for Huber *UPDATE*

On September 17th, Adam David Huber made an appearance at the Courtenay Law Courts for "wilfully resisting or obstructing a peace officer" in Campbell River. Not much is known about this incident. As a service to public interest, and possible safety, Huber is listed as "In Custody" on the BC Court Services Online.

Looks like all three parties met for court today but was adjourned to a future date of October 7th where another date will be set.

Also, looks like a Presentence Report (PSR) will be presented Dec 17th, in court.

*UPDATE OCT 7TH, 2010*
It has now been reported that Adam David Huber was at an apartment party in Campbell River on September 17th. As we reported earlier, Huber was out on bail with conditions; some of which included not consuming alcohol or staying out past his curfew of 10pm.

Police arrived to the apartment to investigate a noise complaint. When they arrived and questioned Huber, he provided false information about his identity to 3 different officers which resulted in the 3/5 charges. The other two charges came from Huber breaking his bail conditions of consuming alcohol and staying out past his court order curfew.

This is the 3rd time Huber broke his bail conditions and last two arrests were just within months of being released. During this last bail hearing, Judge Peter Doherty warned Huber, "the first time that you look at a beer ... you're going to jeopardize your freedom. You're going to be back in jail. You know that."

I must stress again, hearing news of this really does pain me. I don't think incarceration will improve Adam's dependence on social drinking and partying. He needs to find the strength inside to challenge himself to stop drinking and partying. He needs to spend more quality time with family. He needs to stop the generational cycle of alcohol dependence. He needs to become that positive role model for his child.

I know his friends know about his situation, and they are just as guilty if they encourage or condone his behaviour.

Read More:

Man in court
October 07, 2010 - Comox Valley Record

Adam Huber was in court Tuesday for five unrelated charges stemming from an incident in Campbell River last month.

According to Campbell River RCMP, the Comox Valley man was arrested in the area on Sept. 17 following noise complaints from an apartment party.


Friday, August 27, 2010

Dates Set for Sentencing

Crown attorney will present additional evidence against David Samuel White on October 5th, 2010.

During the trial, White was found to have initiated the altercation with his unprovoked racial slur at a visible minority last year. That verbal attack spurred a fight that was captured on video and posted on YouTube where it was viewed a couple hundred thousand times.

Sentencing for all three has been set for Dec 16th, 2010.

Read more:
Court case resumes Oct. 5 - Comox Valley Record

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Adam David Huber, is now out bail again. David White will find out Aug 26th, 2010 if he will be charged with the tougher hate crime conviction for uttering the racial slurs before, during, and after the fight.

Man in high-profile assault back out on bail
Comox Valley Echo - August 17th, 2010

Adam David Huber is back out on bail. The 25-year-old man, found guilty of assaulting black man Jay Philips in a three-on-one attack widely viewed on the video-sharing website YouTube, was released on Thursday.

Read More:

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Sentencing Delayed


Trio sentencing delayed
Comox Valley Record - August 12, 2010

"The three men found guilty of assault for attacking Jay Phillips last year will have to wait until December to hear the repercussions of their actions.

Crown attorney Robert Richardson explained in court Thursday sentencing will take place in two parts for David Samuel White, 19, Robert William Rogers and Adam David Huber, both 25, who attacked Phillips last July."

Read more: http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/comoxvalleyrecord/news/100588604.html

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Witness to Camping Cross Burning Downplays Event

Anonymous said...
I was at that party. I think teenagers nowadays have a different opinion on crosses and what they mean. For a 17 year old, a burning cross is something cool (if stupid to do) and it gets attention. They arent thinking about how racist it is, or how older generations are going to think about it. I am 20. I understand both sides. But I honestly think those guys were just having some stupid, poorly thought out fun.

And as for the "hate crime video" awhile back. There were more reasons for the fight then the public knows about.

That is all.
August 3, 2010 6:01 PM

I don’t agree with those statements. Burning a cross is such an explicit act of racism that there is no other excuse for it. Young people steal garden gnomes and pull donuts in parking lots for attention. Burning a cross is an act of celebrating hate that reinforces racist thinking and attitudes.

Also, I think David White was well aware of the connotations of burning a cross judging from the KKK reference from the image to the right.

Learn More:
What sickens me the most are all the comments on Facebook that commended and praised the young men for this disgusting show of racism. If this is how our young people react to men revelling in racist culture, then I wouldn’t want to be around the Comox Valley in the next 10 years.

I think all this is all due to an explosion of a "racist redneck subculture" that started in the mid 90s. We have always been an urban country community, but I didn't really see gun racks and confederate flags on the back of trucks 'till about 15 years ago. Since then, I've been noticing that teenagers are wearing flannel work jackets and steel toed boots. Which, I find ridiculous since they're only teenagers and shouldn't be working laborious jobs

Lastly, the anonymous commenter hinted that there may have been more to the backstory of the fight that occurred last year. I’ve heard about 3 different rumours about that; I won’t speak of them because those stories were never reported or corroborated with other facts.

Saturday, July 31, 2010

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Guilty Verdict for 3 Attackers

Date for a Sentencing hearing will be set on August 12th, 2010


Three Courtenay men guilty of assault is case with racial overtones
Comox Valley Echo, July 29, 2010 12:03 PM

YouTube trio found guilty of assaulting lone man in Courtenay

July 29th, 2010 - Comox Valley Record

Guilty verdict for assailants in B.C. assault caught on YouTube

July 29th, 2010 - The Globe and Mail

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Unearthed Facebook Photos Caught Attention of the CVCJC

Photos that surfaced on Facebook showed two of the accused with racist imagery, and has now has caught the attention of the Comox Valley Community Justice Centre. Although they say blogging and social media falls outside the way they operate, it's a medium that they need to embrace.

I had some reservations about posting these pictures, but ultimately, I felt these racist attitudes by some of the young people in our community should be brought to light. And that it was in the best interest of the public safety to know that these men socialize and practice racist culture.

If Judge Peter Dorthey does rule that this altercation was racially motivated, I also wanted to show people how practicing these racist behaviors can affect young people later in life.

Learn More:
July 8th, 2010 - Comox Valley Record

Date Set for Judge Peter Doherty's Verdict

3 weeks from now on July 29th, Judge Peter Doherty will give his verdict on the altercation that took place just over year ago between a 39 year old black man and 3 young white males.

Some have said the alternation was racially motivated, while the 3 young men said it was not.

Learn More:
July 8th, 2010 - Comox Valley Record

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Adam Huber Sentenced to 60 Days for Breaking Bail Conditions

Adam Huber was sent to 60 days in jail, less time severed for breaking his bail conditions. As posted before, he was picked up at Lewis Park by police on the evening of June 16th, 2010. It was reported he was caught drinking near the concession stand and smelled of alcohol. Initially he denied those claims, but later, wittiness told police they saw him have "just a couple" at the lake earlier that day.

Adam Huber's Past Convictions
Despite Judge Peter Doherty telling Huber he was already on thin-ice and that if he had "so much as a sip of beer," he would be back in jail, Adam still decided to go out and party that night.

Huber was originally sent to jail for two (2) counts each of impaired driving, one (1) count of driving while prohibited, and (1) count of breaching court orders while at large on assault charges.

In one instance, police witnessed Huber blow through two stops signs. Other witnesses also saw him stumble in and out of his truck. He later left his truck, where police found his wallet and a near empty bottle of whiskey. Adam Huber was arrested a short time later in a nearby dul de sac.

He was released on the promise that he would not consume any alcohol, but two months later police found him leaving Gulliver's Pub after a disturbance. He told police that he "only had half a beer," and that it was "still on the table inside." Huber was arrested again, and released again shortly after.

The last straw for Judge Peter Doherty was when Adam was caught with a drink in the drive-thru at the very same McDonalds that Jay Phillips was assaulted. This time during the bail hearing, Doherty sentenced Adam Huber to 6 months in jail.

At that time, Huber's record already included one (1) conviction for impaired driving and two (2) others for driving without a licence. Doherty told Adam during the bail hearing that day, "Mr. Huber, you obviously have an alcohol problem, looking at your record and the kind of trouble you get in."

I hope this is rock bottom for Adam. I don't say that because I want him to feel misery, but want the best for his future. According to AA's 12 step message, alcoholics can only turn around once they hit rock bottom; this assuming Adam does have an alcohol problem.

Read More:

Monday, June 28, 2010

Defence stand by claim of mutual engagement

During the closing arguments, lawyers for the three defendants stood by their claim that Jay Philips was an equal participant in the fight. They even went as far as to say that Jay Philips was the one who had the motivation to “pick a fight.”

I don’t think whether or not Jay Phillips picked a fight is important. What I’m mainly concerned about is the, alleged, unprovoked verbal and racist attack that Jay suffered before the fight. The crown prosecutor, Bob Richardson, claimed that Adam Huber assumed Jay Phillips was a drug dealer when he saw Philips taking with a teenaged boy. That was when Phillips claimed the three men all threatened to lynch him and called him “Nigger”.

That right there scares me. You can be minding your own business and then be falsely accused and threatened with a lynching reminiscent of the American Deep South decades ago. This is not what I want to see in our community and should not be tolerated. As seen in pictures on Facebook, these young men like to revel in the culture of the Deep South, including having pictures taken in a room full of racist imagery and burning crosses.

Lawyer for Rob Rogers, Doug Marion, who specializes in criminal defense, closed his submission by saying that Philips could had walked from the fight if he wanted to. However, the YouTube video started with two men advancing as Philips was backing away.

Doug Marion went on to say, “You can see him in the video, he’s backing away but his arms are open and he’s screaming ‘come on!’ and then pointing to his chest. The reality is, that is consent.” I disagree with his comment and find some fallacies with his logic.

  • It shouldn’t be considered “consent” if you’ve been backing away from 3 advancing men for 43 seconds.

  • You can’t blame a man for calling action after being verbally assaulted with the word “Nigger” and threated with death by lynching.

  • Justin Smith took the time to back the truck up into a parking spot across the street. Which means they planned to stay a while when they stopped to confront Jay Philips.

Is Jay the bad guy to wanting to fight back? No, he was just defending himself and his personal safety. Anyone would do the same in his shoes.

In Jay’s defence, Bob Richardson said Jay’s actions were within reason and said that, “at that point [Jay’s] got no choice but to engage these people.” He also added that Jay “was trying to make himself bigger to face the danger that was there.”

Both defense and crown consul tried to distrust each other witness’ testimony. Bob Richardson pointed how

  1. Rob Rodgers originally denied drinking before the incident. He ended up confessing he had, “maybe six beer and couple of shots of tequila. “

  2. Adam Huber denied using the word “Nigger,” but later admitted that it “may had been said” and if it was, it was only to describe Jay as a loser. (Funny: when was it okay to liken someone to being a loser by calling them Nigger? I think Adam needs some racial sensitivity education. In fact, all three men involved should take a racial sensitivity course. I’ve said in the past, I think they should travel world in order to respect other cultures and races)

  3. Jay Philips also reported to have disappeared into his apartment when police arrived and then leaving through a back window. It maybe strange behaviour, but doesn’t explain how it related to how this physical engagement started.

  4. Defence lawyer, Doug Marion also attacked Jay’s credibility by saying his heroin addiction and robbery conviction 10 years ago now leaves everything claimed by Jay untrustworthy.

  5. I find it ironic how, Doug Marion, who is a criminal defence lawyer himself, does not believe in second chances. Don’t believe that old adage “You can’t change a man.” People can and have been rehabilitated from a criminal past, despite what Doug Marion suggest from Jay Philips criminal record.

Another court date is now scheduled for July 8th, 2010

More Reading:

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Adam Huber Back In Jail

Adam David Huber is now confirmed to be back in jail after his arrest last week in Lewis Park on the evening of June 16th; just less than two weeks after he was released on bail. The decision to send him back to jail was made during a bail review regarding his multiple drinking and driving arrests.

Huber, along with David White and Rob Rodgers, will appear in court this Monday, June 28th, for the altercation with Jay Philips. There they will hear closing arguments.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Adam Huber Breach Bail Conditions Again *UPDATE*

*Update 18/06/2010* We know now he was allegedly caught drinking in Lewis Park last Wednesday.

Last night Huber breached his bail conditions at Lewis Park. There is no information to what activity Huber did to break those conditions. Some conditions he had were:
  • 10PM curfew
  • No contact with David White or Rob Rogers
  • No consumption of alcohol

He will return to court the same day that he was originally going to appear for the closing augments of the attack case.

I just hope this incident was just a misunderstanding or a fluke of coincidences; and that Adam was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. It pains me to hear that he is in trouble with the law again.

Comox Valley Echo
June 18th, 2010

One of the three men accused in the YouTube assault is in trouble again.

Adam Huber, 25, who has been out on bail, was back in court Thursday charged with violating the conditions of his release.
Huber was alleged to have been caught drinking at Lewis Park on Wednesday night and was arrested.

Huber was released from jail pending a decision in the assault case involving Jay Phillips that was captured on video and posted on YouTube. He is forbidden from consuming alchohol or drugs and had a 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew.

As well, he is also facing several charges related to two drinking and driving incidents.

Comox Valley Record
June 17th, 2010

Adam David Huber, 25, one of a trio of men on trial for an assault on Jay Phillips, will return to court on a breach of his bail conditions following an incident in Lewis Park Wednesday night.

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Adam Huber Out on Bail

During the bail hearing today, Judge Peter Doherty has set Adam's bail at $1,000 with some conditions. They include:
  • No alcohol or drug consumption
  • Attendance to a sobriety support group
  • No contact with David White or Rod Rogers
  • Curfew from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.
  • And more...
Although Adam has had a few problem with conditions set by the court in the past, I hope he'll stay out of trouble this time for family sake. I'm sure he will now that he realizes there are consequences to his actions.

Adam, along with David White and Rod Rogers, will return to court June 28th for closing arguments.

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

The Man Who Drove the Trio to Confront Jay Phillips

Through court preceedings, we now know the driver of the red truck was Justin Stanley Smith (26) from Courtenay, BC.

*Retraction made for the reasons made by commenter below*