Bonnie L. Croll

The Crown applied to have the offender declared a dangerous offender under s. 753 of the Criminal Code following convictions for sexual assault and forcible confinement.

The court reviewed the offender’s extensive criminal history, repeated sexual offences, psychiatric assessments, and risk assessments including PCL‑R, SORAG, and STATIC‑99 scores, all indicating an extremely high risk of sexual and violent recidivism.

Although the defence argued that the risk could be managed through a long‑term offender designation, supervision, age‑related risk reduction, and anti‑androgen medication, the court found there was no reasonable possibility that the offender’s risk could be controlled in the community.

Evidence of persistent non‑compliance, malingering, untreated sexual deviance, and high psychopathy scores supported the conclusion that community supervision would be inadequate.

The court therefore designated the offender a dangerous offender and imposed an indeterminate sentence.

The respondent Commission brought a motion to quash a judicial review application filed by the applicants.

The applicants sought to review the Commission's refusal to enter into a settlement agreement.

The Divisional Court granted the motion to quash, finding that the Commission's discretion to enter into a settlement is not a 'statutory power of decision' under the Judicial Review Procedure Act, as it does not affect legal rights or eligibility for benefits.

No costs were awarded due to miscommunications between the parties.