Sentencing decision following guilty pleas to sexual interference and child luring arising from prolonged online sexual communications with a child, grooming behaviour, and two acts of sexual intercourse when the complainant was 15.
The court held that denunciation and deterrence were the primary objectives under the Criminal Code and applied the Supreme Court of Canada's direction that luring is a distinct offence causing separate harm, warranting consecutive treatment subject to totality.
Despite a guilty plea, no criminal record, strong support, and expert evidence of low risk of reoffending, the court imposed a penitentiary sentence because of the duration of the conduct, the planning and grooming, the age disparity, and the severe psychological harm to the complainant.
The court also granted most ancillary orders, declined the broad park-attendance prohibition for lack of evidentiary foundation, and ordered $10,000 restitution for therapy.