The Crown sought leave to appeal a conditional sentence imposed for three counts of distribution of child pornography and one count of possession of child pornography, arguing the sentencing judge misapprehended the offence circumstances, failed to grasp the nature of the offences, and gave insufficient weight to denunciation and general deterrence.
The court held the sentencing judge was aware of the relevant facts, was entitled to accept the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence that the respondent was not a pedophile, and properly relied on a closely analogous prior authority.
The court reaffirmed that, for certain offenders, a strict conditional sentence can adequately serve denunciation and general deterrence in child pornography cases.
Leave to appeal was granted, but the sentence appeal was dismissed.
