Judge describes Indigenous offender as ‘another unfortunate product of the disastrous programs of colonization directed at the Indigenous people of this country.’
WINNIPEG, Man., — A Winnipeg man has been sentenced to seven years in prison for the manslaughter of Rachel Muswagon, after a judge found he stabbed her in the neck during a domestic dispute over $20.
Dustin Cody Swampy, 31, was sentenced in Court of King’s Bench on June 23. Swampy was originally charged with second-degree murder but was found guilty of the lesser offence of manslaughter on March 25.
Court heard the incident occurred on May 17, 2024, at Swampy’s apartment. His spouse Shania, her mother Stella Muswagon, and Rachel Muswagon had been drinking alcohol and using cocaine and crack cocaine overnight. Swampy returned home after work with a bottle of vodka and appeared intoxicated.
An argument erupted between Swampy and Shania regarding $20. Rachel attempted to de-escalate by offering the money.
Rachel and Swampy were yelling at one another and Shania got between them, trying to push Swampy away, court heard. Swampy pulled a 14-centimeter kitchen knife out of his pocket, swung it over his shoulder one-time, stabbing Rachel in the neck.
Justice Harris observed that Rachel Muswagon is survived by her spouse and young children. Mr. Swampy briefly left the apartment after the stabbing but returned, provided aid to Rachel and called 911, remaining until police arrived.
In sentencing, Justice Harris described Swampy as “another unfortunate product of the disastrous programs of colonization directed at the Indigenous people of this country.”
Court heard that both of Swampy’s parents attended residential school, and his parents and grandparents had substance abuse issues. He grew up in Winnipeg, witnessing his father assault his mother while drinking. Swampy and his siblings were in and out of foster care throughout their childhood and adolescence, and he experienced physical and emotional abuse in some placements.
Swampy has a Grade 8 education and had been employed as a roofer for three years prior to his arrest. Substance abuse has been a problem throughout his adult life. He has been assessed as a high risk to offend, though the court noted he has completed numerous programs while in custody, including anger management and healthy relationships courses.
“He has also completed information sessions – Life Skills, Problem Solving, Understanding Feelings, Anger Management, Supportive Relationships, Managing Stress and Changing Habits. He also attends Chapel and Indigenous ceremonies when offered,” said the judge.
“In my opinion, this demonstrates Mr. Swampy’s intention to break the cycle that has brought him to court.”
The Crown had sought a sentence of 10 years less time in custody, while defence counsel argued for seven years less time served.
The judge identified several mitigating circumstances. Swampy was gainfully employed at the time, that he provided aid to Rachel and called 911, that he has “engaged meaningfully in programing while in custody, demonstrating an intention to move forward in a positive way,” and that “the impacts of colonialization are significant in Mr. Swampy’s life.”
Aggravating circumstances included that Swampy armed himself with a knife during a domestic dispute and “used that knife against a defenseless victim who posed no risk of harm to Swampy,” that his children were present and witnessed the violence, and that Rachel Muswagon was a member of his spouse’s family – which the judge noted is “statutorily aggravating.”
Justice Harris referenced several comparable cases in reaching the sentence. The judge cited the principles outlined in R. v. Thompson, including that “the over-arching purpose in sentencing an offender is to foster respect for the law and the maintenance of a safe and peaceful society through just sanctions” and that “a sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender.”
“In a domestic context, the objectives of denunciation and deterrence gain added significance and require heightened attention to the moral blameworthiness of the offender,” wrote the judge, quoting from case law.
“There is no doubt that taking a life is a serious offence. No sentence nor remorse of Mr. Swampy can undo the harm and suffering that he has caused,” said Justice Harris.
“Having regard to all of the circumstances, I find that the appropriate sentence is one of seven years of incarceration, less time served credited at 1.5 to 1.”
The judge also ordered a DNA order pursuant to section 487.051 of the Criminal Code and a weapons ban for 10 years after Swampy’s release.
