Arlan Galbraith was sentenced to seven years in prison Tuesday, nearly six years after the bird-breeding business he founded went bankrupt.

Galbraith was the founder of Pigeon King International, which sold pigeon-breeding contracts to nearly 1,000 farmers in Canada and the United States.

After the company’s 2008 bankruptcy, questions began to emerge over its business model and whether there was a sustainable end market for the birds – or if the company could only stay afloat by finding more investors to purchase pigeons from those who had already bought in.

Following a month-long trial last fall, jurors ultimately decided on the second option, finding Galbraith guilty of criminal fraud and two Bankruptcy Act offences.

Appearing in a Kitchener court Tuesday, Galbraith was unshaven and appeared to have lost a substantial amount of weight since December’s verdict.

His lawyer – hired only after the guilty verdict as Galbraith represented himself during the trial – noted that Galbraith had suffered physically while in prison.

Justice Gerry Taylor acknowledged that, but said the main factor behind his sentence was that Galbraith refuses to admit any wrongdoing.

Bill Top, a former salesperson for Pigeon King, says he has the same concern.

“Seven years is OK, but he’s never said sorry,” Top told CTV News outside court.

“He should at least admit to his wrongdoings. There are a lot of people hurting.”

When the company went bankrupt, it had paid about $30 million to 394 pigeon breeders – but had committed to paying them a further $350 million.

The only way it could make those payments, court heard, was to find more breeders.

In turn, that would put Pigeon King on the hook for a further $3 billion in payments.

Crown prosecutor Lynn Robinson says the case should serve as a cautionary tale.

“Anyone who’s even thinking of defrauding the citizens of this community … should look to this case and realize they’re going to be doing some significant penitentiary time,” she says.

Although Pigeon King investors are owed a significant amount of money, Taylor ruled that Galbraith did not have the means to cover restitution.