The accused was tried on charges arising from text and internet communications in which he solicited assistance from a sex worker to abduct and sexually assault a child, and later engaged in sexually explicit online discussions with an undercover officer posing as a mother.
The central issue was whether the communications were mere fantasy and role play or reflected the subjective intent required for counselling offences and for making arrangements under s. 172.2(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.
The court rejected the role-playing explanation as not credible, relied in part on similar fact evidence from other sex workers, and found that the communications with the sex worker were specific, repeated, and grounded in price, place, and timing.
Findings of guilt were entered on counselling, making arrangements, child pornography, and recognizance breach counts, but the accused was acquitted on the undercover-officer arrangement count because the communications remained too preliminary.
