An Indigenous Quesnel man has been sentenced for a violent hatchet attack during a robbery at a Quesnel hardware store in November 2024.
Judge Judith Doulis has sentenced David George Wesley, 21, to a 30-month custodial sentence for a violent attempted robbery and aggravated assault, ruling that a significant jail term was required despite his diminished moral culpability.
The sentence was delivered Feb. 5, 2025, after Wesley pleaded guilty to attempting to rob and assault a store employee during a Nov. 10, 2024, incident at Eagle Home Building Supplies in Quesnel.
The court heard that on the afternoon of November 10, 2024, Wesley entered the store with two other individuals and gathered merchandise, including tools and a hatchet, before attempting to leave without paying. When an employee confronted him near the exit, Wesley turned and struck the employee in the head with a hatchet.
As the employee and a co-worker tried to restrain him, Wesley escalated the violence, pulling out a knife and stabbing the employee in the arm before fleeing. The attack was captured on surveillance footage and witnessed by multiple employees.
The employee suffered significant injuries, including heavy bleeding and lasting scars, but ultimately made a full recovery after missing a couple of days of work. The incident left a lasting emotional impact on staff and prompted the store to introduce new safety measures.
Wesley was identified through a backpack he left behind containing his identification, as well as surveillance footage and police recognition. He was arrested the following day at the Seasons House Shelter in Quesnel after checking in under a false name and has remained in custody ever since.
Wesley pleaded guilty in October 2025 to attempted robbery and aggravated assault. A third charge relating to possession of weapons was not pursued following the pleas.
At sentencing, the Crown sought a three-year prison term, arguing the attack was unprovoked, involved multiple weapons, and reflected an escalating pattern of violent behaviour. The defence argued for a time-served sentence followed by probation, pointing to Wesley’s youth and extensive personal hardships.
In her decision, Judge Doulis described the offences as grave, emphasizing that robbery and aggravated assault are among the most serious crimes in Canadian law, particularly where weapons are used. She noted that Wesley used both a hatchet and a knife against an unarmed victim and persisted in the attack despite opportunities to disengage.
The judge also highlighted Wesley’s criminal history, which includes numerous prior convictions for violence, weapons offences, and breaches of court orders dating back to his early teens.
“The violent incident during the daytime in a large department store undermined the sense of well-being and security of the employees and patrons,” Judge Doulis noted.
However, the court found Wesley’s moral culpability was significantly reduced due to his personal circumstances. Born in Hazelton and a member of the Witset and Gitxsan First Nations, Wesley experienced a childhood marked by instability, trauma, and disconnection from family and culture.
He was taken into government care as an infant, moved through multiple foster homes, and lost his mother at a young age. As a teenager, he began using drugs, including heroin and fentanyl, and developed serious mental health issues, including psychotic episodes.
The court also considered the broader systemic factors affecting Indigenous people, including the legacy of residential schools and the Sixties Scoop, which impacted Wesley’s family directly. His grandmother attended residential school, and his mother was apprehended as part of the Sixties Scoop.
Judge Doulis acknowledged the broader historical and systemic context affecting Wesley’s life.
She described Wesley as “a casualty of the intergenerational impact of Canada’s assimilationist policies,” noting factors including family disconnection, abuse, addiction, homelessness and lack of cultural ties.
As a result, the judge concluded that “David Wesley’s moral culpability is lower than someone without those factors in their life.”
Wesley’s youth was another key consideration. He was 19 at the time of the offence, and the court noted that young offenders generally have reduced culpability and greater potential for rehabilitation. Despite his criminal history, the judge concluded it was too early to say Wesley’s prospects for change were exhausted.
“His brain is still maturing, and with it, his powers of reason and decision-making abilities,” Judge Doulis said, adding that “his youth alone makes David Wesley’s rehabilitation a realistic prospect.”
At the same time, the court expressed concern about Wesley’s lack of progress while in custody. According to a pre-sentence report, he showed little remorse initially, blamed the victim for the incident, and continued to use substances while incarcerated. Although he expressed some remorse at sentencing, the judge found it “has not spawned a genuine awareness, or change in attitude, or incentivized rehabilitation.”
The court also considered Wesley’s mental health and addiction issues, but found there was insufficient medical evidence to establish a direct link between his conditions and the offences. His drug use at the time of the incident did not significantly reduce his responsibility, particularly given the intentional nature of the robbery.
“I am not persuaded that committing the robbery and aggravated assault because he was “dope sick” makes David Wesley significantly less morally blameworthy than someone who commits crimes for money or some other reason,” Judge Doulis said in her sentencing.
Judge Doulis rejected the defence request for a time-served sentence, finding that releasing Wesley into the community at this stage would pose an unacceptable risk to public safety. She also determined that a conditional sentence served in the community was not appropriate.
“The offences are grave, but Mr. Wesley’s moral culpability is significantly reduced,” the judge stated, calling the sentencing decision a difficult balance between punishment and rehabilitation.
The final sentence of 30 months was lower than the Crown’s request, reflecting the mitigating effect of Wesley’s youth and Indigenous background, but still emphasized denunciation and deterrence.
After accounting for 645 days of pre-sentence credit, Wesley has approximately 255 days left to serve.
Following his release, Wesley will be subject to 18 months of probation with strict conditions, including no contact with Quesnel’s Eagle Home Building Supplies employees, a ban from returning to the business, mandatory reporting to a probation officer, and participation in any counselling or treatment programs as directed.
He is also prohibited from possessing weapons, including knives, outside of limited circumstances, and will be subject to a lifetime firearms ban for certain categories of weapons. A DNA order was also imposed.
The judge waived the victim fine surcharge, citing Wesley’s financial circumstances after a lengthy period in custody.