As with most aspects of Peter Krizan’s case, not even the sentencing was straightforward.

That’s what Judge Michael Cozens said Wednesday when he found Krizan guilty of assault with a weapon and breach of probation, then took a day to decide on sentencing.

Krizan, a former veterinarian, had been charged with assault with a weapon, break and enter, possession of a weapon for dangerous purposes, mischief under $5,000, theft of a credit card and breach of probation.

All charges were related to Nov. 7, 2015, when Krizan visited the home of Ron Asuchak at around 4 a.m.

At the time, Asuchak was returning home with Krizan’s wife, Benita Allison, who had been living with Asuchak while Krizan was in custody on another matter.

The pair found Krizan in the driveway, carrying a wooden axe handle.

During Krizan’s trial last December, defence lawyer Vincent Larochelle suggested Krizan went to Asuchak’s place to speak with Allison about her drug use.

Paul Battin, the Crown prosecutor, alleged Krizan was upset that Allison had left him. He said Krizan threatened both Asuchak and Allison during the visit.

Additional charges were related to a broken car window, the ransacked nature of Asuchak’s home, and a stolen credit card found on Krizan when the RCMP were called.

In his decision, Judge Cozens said he rejected much of the evidence presented at that trial based on the number of inconsistencies in testimony between the various witnesses, as well as between the witnesses and the RCMP officers who attended the incident.

“Some of these inconsistencies matter ... some do not,” said Cozens.

He said he believed Allison and Asuchak minimized their drug use in their testimony.

He found it strange that the pair couldn’t remember why they left Asuchak’s home to travel downtown at around 3 a.m.

He found Allison to have been cavalier with her testimony at points.

Responding to a question about whether she had lied to police regarding a history of violence with Krizan, she asked, “Does it matter?”

Judge Cozens didn’t find there was enough evidence to confirm that Krizan had broken the car window or damaged Asuchak’s home.

He also believed Krizan’s testimony that the stolen credit card was in a wallet Allison had thrown at him that night. The card had gone missing while Krizan was in custody on another matter, Judge Cozens said.

He noted that though he did find Krizan guilty of assault with a weapon, it was largely a technicality. The weapon, an axe handle, was never raised nor brandished, though Krizan did suggest that if Asuchak didn’t go inside, “the situation could get nasty.”

He was also guilty of breaching a probation order to keep the peace and be of good behaviour that night, and guilty of two additional breaches of probation and recognizance.

Battin argued Krizan’s history of breaches was troubling enough to warrant consecutive sentences. He asked for a total of 255 days jail time.

“I can tell your honour that it’s my submission that I believe Mr. Krizan ignores the orders that he’s subject to,” Battin said. He stated he believed it “waters down the effect of these orders when they’re not taken seriously.”

“The order needs to be given teeth, if you will,” Battin said.

Larochelle asked for the breach charges to be served concurrently, asking for a total of 80 days’ jail time.

He argued this sentence would be deterrent enough because Krizan understood that his breach charges resulted in his getting less credit for time served than he otherwise would have (without the probation breach, he would have received one-and-a-half days of credit for each day already in custody).

In the end, Judge Cozens gave Krizan 60 days for the assault, 30 days for a breach of probation, one day for an additional breach, and 15 days for a breach of recognizance.

Having already spent 84 days in custody, Krizan will serve 22 days.