N. Sheiban

The offenders, foster parents to two Indigenous children, were found guilty of first degree murder of one child and unlawful confinement, assault with a weapon, and failure to provide necessaries of life to the other.

The court sentenced them to the mandatory life imprisonment without parole for 25 years for the murder.

For the offences against the surviving child, the court imposed sentences of 3 years, 2 years, and the maximum 5 years respectively, to be served consecutively to each other and concurrently with the life sentence.

The court emphasized the extreme vulnerability of the victims and the profound breach of trust, prioritizing denunciation and deterrence.

After a lengthy judge-alone criminal trial, the court convicted the accused foster parents on counts of unlawful confinement, assault with a weapon, failure to provide the necessaries of life, and constructive first degree murder.

The court rejected the defence evidence in its entirety, accepted the surviving child’s evidence on the core abuse allegations, and relied heavily on electronic communications, treating medical evidence, and expert pediatric and forensic pathology evidence.

The court held that prolonged confinement, use of zip ties and other restraints, deprivation of food, and failure to obtain urgent medical care established the offences relating to the surviving child and also formed part of the same single ongoing transaction of abuse and neglect that culminated in the older child’s death.

Applying the causation principles in Nette and the constructive first degree murder framework in Harbottle and Sundman, the court found that the accused’s failure to provide adequate food and medical attention was a substantial cause of death, that unlawful confinement was the underlying crime of domination, and that the Crown proved the requisite intent for murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused, a young Black man with no prior record, pleaded guilty to possessing a loaded restricted firearm, altering its serial number, and operating a conveyance with a blood alcohol concentration over 80mg.

The court considered social context evidence regarding systemic racism and the accused's background, which mitigated his moral culpability for arming himself out of fear.

Acknowledging his strict compliance with house arrest bail conditions for over three years and his significant rehabilitative steps, the court imposed a 20-month conditional sentence followed by 16 months of probation, rather than the penitentiary term sought by the Crown.

Sentencing for possession of child pornography arising from 24 videos discovered on a workplace-related USB drive.

The court applied the Supreme Court's guidance in Friesen, emphasizing the gravity of sexual offences against children and the need for meaningful denunciation and deterrence, while also treating the offender's prolonged childhood sexual abuse, addiction recovery, remorse, insight, guilty plea, and low risk to children as highly mitigating.

Although the court stated that an ordinary first offender possessing similar material would generally attract eight to ten months' custody, it held this was an exceptional case warranting a one-year conditional sentence followed by three years' probation.

The court also imposed forfeiture, SOIRA registration, a DNA order, and a tailored ten-year internet prohibition under s. 161(d), but declined broader s. 161(b) and (c) orders for lack of evidence of risk to children.

The offender pleaded guilty to possession of a loaded prohibited firearm and breach of a firearms prohibition order.

The court considered a social history report detailing the offender's experiences with poverty and systemic anti-black racism.

Applying the contextual approach from Ipeelee, the court found that these systemic factors significantly reduced the offender's moral blameworthiness.

The offender was sentenced to time served, equivalent to 49 months after applying enhanced credit for pre-trial custody and lockdowns, along with a nominal fine.