2 total
Custody Relief denied
The court imposed an indeterminate sentence on the offender following his designation as a dangerous offender.
The offender had sexually assaulted and forcibly confined a 23-year-old victim in April 2017.
He had a significant criminal history including prior sexual offences against children and adults.
Two psychiatrists provided evidence regarding risk assessment, treatability, and management prospects.
The court found that neither a conventional determinate sentence nor a determinate sentence with long-term supervision would adequately protect the public, given the offender's chronic dangerousness, lack of insight, minimization of responsibility, sexual deviance, and poor treatment outcomes despite multiple prior interventions.
The court designated the offender a dangerous offender but imposed a fixed sentence and long-term supervision order instead of an indeterminate sentence.
The defendant was charged with 14 counts arising from a two-month period of criminal conduct directed at his former intimate partner and her three children, including attempted murder, uttering death threats, criminal harassment, and breach of probation.
The defendant pleaded guilty to nine counts and was tried on the remaining five.
He was acquitted of three counts of attempted murder but convicted of attempted possession of a prohibited firearm.
The Crown brought a dangerous offender application under section 753 of the Criminal Code.
The court found the defendant met the criteria for a dangerous offender designation based on a pattern of repetitive criminal harassment involving intimate partners spanning approximately 25 years across two countries.
The court imposed a four-year sentence for criminal harassment followed by a maximum ten-year long-term supervision order, finding that this lesser measure would adequately protect the public, rather than imposing an indeterminate sentence.