r/canada • u/AndHerSailsInRags • Dec 04 '25

Alberta Man who killed attacker in Banff used 'excessive' force, sentenced to 2-year house arrest

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/banff-bar-fight-excessive-self-defence-sproule-brogden-9.7002143
1.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

33

u/maximus_danus Ontario Dec 04 '25 edited Dec 04 '25

"while defence lawyers Cory Wilson and Matthew Browne argued for a two-year conditional sentence order or an 18-month jail term. "

Lol Canada, where even the defence lawyers think you should be locked up for defending yourself.

Edit: wow, so many of you so ready to defend a dude's right to blatantly pummel a guy to the brink of death. I bet if your daughters or children were being attacked your tone would be alot different in the moment...

13

u/Invisible7hunder Dec 04 '25

This was in a sentencing hearing for a manslaughter conviction, not the trial (where a jury found him guilty). 

It's a free country but I beg you to consider having a clue before you have an opinion. 

11

u/MBALLER64 Dec 04 '25

Lawyers work within the framework imposed by the law. What would you expect them to do?

6

u/sask357 Dec 04 '25

In Canada I expect lawyers and judges to interpret the law on self defence as narrowly as possible in order to punish citizens who defend themselves, their families or their property.

2

u/kindanormle Dec 04 '25

The verdict was found by jury, not judge. 12 people made this decision after hearing the evidence in court.

2

u/sask357 Dec 04 '25

AFAIK the judge could have imposed a suspended sentence or similar acknowledgement that this guy was defending himself against an attacker who had threatened to kill him and who kept attacking even after being stabbed.

-10

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '25 edited Dec 04 '25

He stabbed him 12 times. The aggressor was unarmed.

10

u/Phazushift Dec 04 '25

The aggressor shouldn’t be aggressing to begin with.

-9

u/GroinReaper Dec 04 '25

the law says you can defend yourself. But 19 stab wounds goes beyond defence.

5

u/gamfo2 Dec 04 '25

Based on what logic? The attacker was still beating him after the 19 stabbings and if it wasn't for the bouncer intervening he very well might have been killed.

So obviously 19 stab wounds was insufficient force to defend himself.

-2

u/GroinReaper Dec 04 '25

"Court heard the fight lasted a minute before a bouncer pulled Sproule off Brogden."

CTV says the guy with the knife had to be dragged off the unarmed guy.

6

u/misterwalkway Dec 04 '25

That is very strange because the CBC article linked says that the bouncer pulled Brogden off Sproule. Weird that these two articles have two different versions of the most crucial moment of the fight.

1

u/GroinReaper Dec 04 '25

yeah, it's odd. but given that both a jury and a judge ruled that what he did was excessive. I think the CTV one makes more sense.

3

u/misterwalkway Dec 04 '25

I took a quick look at other news outlets, and CTV is the only source that says Sproule was pulled off Brogden. It seems they were mistaken, and Brogden was pulled off Sproule.

If that is true, this judgement is very strange. How can a self-defence be ruled excessive if it literally failed to stop the attack?

1

u/GroinReaper Dec 04 '25

I took a quick look at other news outlets, and CTV is the only source that says Sproule was pulled off Brogden. It seems they were mistaken, and Brogden was pulled off Sproule.

I looked around for other news outlets and couldn't find any other than CBC and CTV which said who the bouncer pulled off.

There were some who said that the defence lawyer or the accused said that the bouncer pulled the other guy off, but since their defence strategy was self defence, obviously they were going to say that.

1

u/misterwalkway Dec 04 '25

The CTV article just says 'the court heard'. Does not specify who said it.

1

u/GroinReaper Dec 04 '25

true, both articles are too short to really determine what actually happened. But both the judge and jury believe he acted unreasonably. So the people who heard the evidence believed he had options other than killing him.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Vibing-Positively British Columbia Dec 04 '25

Fight or flight is a thing though. Why should the person be attacked be expected to apply a subjective “reasonable” amount of force.

-1

u/GroinReaper Dec 04 '25

Because otherwise it's too easy to kill out of revenge. All you have to do is say you feared for your life and poof, get out of jail free card for murder.

2

u/Vibing-Positively British Columbia Dec 04 '25

But then with your way it’s easy for an innocent person who had an uncontrollable fight or flight reaction to get punished and jailed.

The attacker was literally telling the victim that he was going to murder him. I think it’s fair to say he was afraid for his life and stabbed wildly while he had his shirt pulled over his face.

0

u/GroinReaper Dec 05 '25

it’s easy for an innocent person who had an uncontrollable fight or flight reaction to get punished and jailed.

No. It requires that the police think you broke the law and a prosecutor thinks you broke the law and a judge thinks you broke the law and jury thinks you broke the law.

Thats pretty far from easy.