Marni Munsterman

This decision addresses the sentencing of J.V. for luring contrary to section 172.1(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.

The accused, suffering from Parkinson’s Disease and a neurodevelopmental disorder, pleaded guilty and sought a conditional sentence due to his medical vulnerabilities and diminished moral blameworthiness linked to his medication and cognitive impairments.

The Court balanced aggravating factors, including the sending of explicit images and intent to meet a purported minor, against mitigating factors such as remorse, lack of prior relevant record, and significant health issues.

The Court imposed a conditional sentence of two years less a day with house arrest and probation, alongside lifetime prohibitions and registration orders, emphasizing individualized sentencing and the accommodation of medical needs.

The offender, R. V., was found guilty of sexual interference involving a 7-8 year old female child.

The sentencing proceeded in abstentia due to the offender's unconfirmed whereabouts.

The court considered aggravating factors including repeated incidents with penetration, a dated but significant criminal record, and a breach of trust, alongside mitigating factors such as a strong work history, family support, health issues, and a low risk of re-offending.

Applying the principles from Friesen (2020 SCC 9), which emphasizes denunciation and deterrence for child sexual abuse, the court imposed an 8-year prison sentence.

The accused, J.M., was charged with sexual offences against his stepdaughter, B.V., a young person under 16 years of age, between June 1, 2017 and December 30, 2017.

The charges included sexual touching contrary to section 151 of the Criminal Code, sexual touching by a person in a position of trust or authority contrary to section 153(1)(a), and sexual assault contrary to section 271.

The trial proceeded over five days.

The Crown's case rested primarily on the testimony of the complainant, a child witness.

The accused denied all allegations.

The court found the complainant credible and reliable, rejected the accused's evidence, and convicted him on all counts.

The court found that the accused intentionally touched the complainant for a sexual purpose on approximately ten occasions, exploiting his position of trust and the complainant's vulnerability.

The offender was convicted of forgery and obstruction of justice after submitting a forged letter of support from her employer during a sentencing hearing for a previous fraud conviction.

The Crown sought a three-year custodial sentence, while the defence proposed 12 to 18 months.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence, noting the offender's premeditated attempt to deceive the court and her prior criminal record.

The offender was sentenced to a global term of 20 months' imprisonment, followed by 12 months of probation.

The Crown's request for a DNA order was denied.