Man accepted responsibility for murder over time, court told

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 31/03/2021 (1793 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

BRANDON — A man convicted of first-degree murder entered the prison system in 2005 with a lack of remorse, but gradually developed a sense of empathy, a Manitoba courtroom heard Tuesday.

Michael Bridges was sentenced to 25 years in prison without parole for the 2002 murder of 18-year-old Brandon woman Erin Chorney, when he was 24 years old.

Tuesday marked the second day of the hearing to determine whether he can apply for parole early under a now-repealed section of the Criminal Code (the so-called “faint hope clause”). It will not determine if Bridges will be granted parole, if successful.

Joshua Beatty, Stony Mountain Institution manager of assessments and interventions for the mental health unit, testified first for the defence.

Bridges arrived at the Manitoba prison in June 2005. Under questioning from defence lawyer Ryan Amy, Beatty testified Bridges was first rated as a medium-security inmate.

Initially, Bridges displayed a lack of remorse for killing Chorney, according to a psychological risk assessment report.

“It is noteworthy that Mr. Bridges did not express any remorse about his role in the victim’s death. This seemed like an actual lack of remorse rather than an effort to not compromise his legal appeal process by accepting responsibility in any way,” Beatty read Tuesday from the report.

“In addition to his arrogant presentation style, during our interviews, lack of remorse was also indicated by his documented behaviour following the murder. As mentioned earlier in this report, two days following the murder, he resumed his lifestyle.”

As time progressed, Bridges started to accept responsibility, Beatty said. Later prison reports said Bridges felt remorse for his actions and he wished to apologize to the victim’s family.

Bridges also completed a number of programs around family violence, Beatty said.

He has held a number of jobs, including in the prison canteen, metal shop, and as sports program co-ordinator. Eventually, Bridges was allowed to live in the minimum security unit.

There were some notable issues with Bridges’ behaviour in prison, however, Beatty said. On one occasion, he was caught with contraband pornographic DVDs.

Amy asked Beatty whether he would consider Bridges to be a model inmate.

Beatty said he couldn’t give a personal opinion, but the reports say he has done well.

“When you look at all the information presented before you, he’s clearly doing things (in Stony Mountain) that he should be doing, more so than he’s doing things he shouldn’t,” Beatty testified.

Crown attorney Joel Myskiw raised issue with the fact the prison reports are based on what Bridges himself tells the interviewers.

“There is no way that you can say whether Mr. Bridges was being honest or dishonest in speaking to anyone that authored those reports,” he said.

Beatty agreed, but said officers are not mind-readers and have to try to find patterns or inconsistencies in what inmates say.

Myskiw suggested the fact Bridges misled police for almost two years after the murder shows he is capable of long-term deceit.

Bridges was only arrested after a RCMP sting operation in which he believed he was confessing to a member of a criminal organization. Chorney’s body was found buried in another person’s grave in 2004.

“Mr. Bridges is obviously capable of long-term and serious dishonestly and deception. During that time frame he covered up a murder, he destroyed as much evidence as he could, he lied in his interview with the Brandon Police Service,” the Crown said.

Myskiw also raised the fact Bridges has spent the last 17 years without the stresses of life outside prison, such as finances or relationships.

The faint hope clause was repealed from the Criminal Code in December 2011, but Bridges can still apply as he was convicted prior to its removal. It allowed offenders sentenced to life imprisonment with a “parole eligibility period of greater than 15 years to apply for early parole once they have served 15 years.”

The hearing is scheduled to continue today.

— Brandon Sun