A Coquitlam man who ran over another man in his vehicle after he was accosted and called a “wannabe Ziggy Marley” has been ordered by a judge to pay more than $130,000 in damages.
Late at night on June 8, 2010, Marc Audette drove after work to a Subway located in a Coquitlam shopping mall to buy a sandwich, but got into a confrontation with a man at the restaurant.
As he got out of his car, Audette was accosted by Joel Ackley, who had been drinking and was hanging out at the restaurant with some friends.
Ackley, who was 19 years old at the time and now is 24, testified at trial that he commented on the fact that Ackley had dreadlocks, calling him a “wannabe Ziggy Marley,” a reference to the reggae singer. He claimed that he was showing off for his friends and trying to be funny.
Other words were exchanged by the two men both outside and inside the restaurant, with Ackley claiming Audette called him a “bitch,” according to a ruling released by the B.C. Supreme Court.
The incident ended with Audette, who was 20 years old at the time and now is 25, getting back into his car and striking Ackley as he drove away. Ackley suffered significant injuries, including a fractured pelvis, and continues to suffer pain in his hips, pelvis and lower back.
At trial the two men gave different versions of the event, Ackley testifying that when Audette walked back to his car, he met him at the driver door and initially grabbed the door to stop him.
Ackley said that as he walked away, he heard a screech and his friends yelled at him to turn around and as he did so, he saw the lights of Audette’s car and he was hit. He said he blacked out and when he came to, he was lying under the car, which then ran over him as it moved to leave.
Audette, who denied liability and argued that he did not act intentionally or recklessly, said he just wanted to pick up some food at the restaurant and Ackley had said rude things to him about his hair, which he had recently put into dreadlocks that were still quite short and sticking out.
Thinking that Ackley was trying to pick a fight with him, he entered the restaurant and ordered a sandwich. He said Ackley followed him and said some more rude things to him.
Audette testified he swore at Ackley and told him to leave him alone and that when he left the restaurant, Ackley followed him and was pushing him in the back and still yelling and swearing at him.
He testified that Ackley tried to prevent him from getting into his car.
As he pulled the door shut, said Audette, Ackley went “berserk” and hit his car on the driver’s side window and on the hood, terrifying him.
He said he put the car into reverse, backed up a short distance, turned the steering wheel to the left, intending to turn through the stall where he’d been parked and leave the lot.
But while he was backing up, he said, Ackley was still beside the car on the driver’s side and as he accelerated forward, Ackley turned to run back toward his friends and moved directly in front of his car.
Audette said he swerved to the right but could not avoid Ackley, who was pushed by the front of the car and then fell under it as the car went over bushes in a planter.
Audette said he did not stop but drove away because he was panicked and didn’t know if he had killed Ackley. After speaking to a friend, he returned to the scene and was later interviewed by RCMP.
In his ruling, Justice Ronald Skolrood said Audette did not intentionally run over Ackley and accepted that it was his intention to get away from him, so he backed up the vehicle and then put it into drive to get around Ackley. He concluded that Ackley was the instigator but did not clear Audette of blame.
“While he may not have acted intentionally in striking Mr. Ackley, I nonetheless find that Mr. Audette was negligent in the operation of his vehicle,” said the judge.
“He knew that Mr. Ackley was in the vicinity of the vehicle and he conceded that moving back into the parking space that he had just vacated was an unpredictable move. He also acknowledged stepping on the accelerator with more force than he intended.”
Audette argued that even if he was found negligent, he should be absolved of liability. He claimed that Ackley, through his aggressive conduct, voluntarily accepted the risk that he would be injured, but the judge rejected that argument and several others.
Skolrood found Audette 60-per-cent negligent and Ackley 40-per-cent negligent.
He awarded Ackley a total of $221,882 in damages, including $100,000 for pain and suffering, but reduced his award to $133,000 after calculating the respective negligence of the two men.
