The Crown appealed the blended sentences of 23 months (including a 17-month conditional sentence) imposed on the respondents for repeated sexual offences against their son over a 9-year period.
The Court of Appeal found the sentences manifestly unfit, noting that such profoundly exploitive breaches of trust require a penitentiary term.
The sentencing judge erred by relying on an inappropriately absolving report, treating the repetitive assaults as isolated incidents, and failing to give sufficient consideration to denunciation.
The appeal was allowed, and a sentence of 3 years' imprisonment was substituted.
