A Saskatchewan man’s appeal of his conviction and sentence for abducting his daughter to prevent her from getting the COVID-19 vaccine has been dismissed.
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal issued its decision Tuesday after hearing arguments in Regina last month.
A jury convicted Michael Gordon Jackson of parental child abduction after a trial in Regina Court of King’s Bench in 2024. He was sentenced to one year in jail and two years of probation but didn’t have to serve any more time in custody due to credit for his time on remand.
The charge was laid after Jackson picked up his seven-year-old daughter from school for scheduled parenting time in November 2021. He was supposed to return her to the girl’s mother five days later but didn’t.
The child wasn’t returned until Jackson was arrested in British Columbia more than three months later.
He testified at trial he believed his ex-wife was going to get their daughter vaccinated for COVID-19 and he believed the vaccine was dangerous. The mother had final decision-making authority on health matters under the authority of a prior ruling made after a family law trial, also held in Regina Court of King’s Bench.
Jackson argued at his criminal trial that the jury should be able to consider the defence of necessity. He said he took his daughter “to avert an imminent harm” and there was no alternative because he considered the court system to be corrupt.
The trial judge ruled the argument did not have an “air of reality” and refused to present it to the jury.
The appeal court said the judge made the right decision.
“A reasonable person would not conclude that a person dissatisfied with a ruling of the court can simply take matters into their own hands and act in contravention of such ruling,” Justice Jerome Tholl wrote, with justices Naheed Bardai and Keith Kilback concurring.
By finding the appeal failed on that basis, Tholl noted he didn’t need to consider the issue of “imminent harm,” so the judgment “should not be taken as having decided” the issue.
The judges also dismissed Jackson’s appeal of his sentence. He had argued the judge didn’t take into account an earlier jail sentence he served for contempt.
The appeal court judges said the argument failed on a number of grounds, saying Jackson didn’t raise it at the time of sentencing and the contempt proceedings related to separate family court orders.
