ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
COURT FILE No.: Toronto 4810 998 24 31113999-00
4810 998 24 48133314-00
BETWEEN:
HIS MAJESTY THE KING
— AND —
JASMINE DEDAM
Before Justice André Chamberlain
Heard on May 9 and September 11, 2025, and March 23, 2026
Reasons for Sentence Read July 6, Released on July 8, 2026
Peter Hamm......................................................................................... counsel for the Crown
Richard Sherman (Leah Gensey)............... counsel for the accused Jasmine Dedam
1Jasmine Dedam is a First Nations woman from Elsipogtog First Nation, a Mi’kmaq community on the east coast of New Brunswick. She pleaded guilty on May 9, 2025, to two charges: aggravated assault and assault causing bodily harm.
2The case was adjourned on that day to set a sentencing circle in the Gladue Court and to arrange a judicial pre-trial to facilitate that process.
The Facts of the Offences
Aggravated Assault (November 3, 2024)
3Jasmine Dedam, Krystyne Meeches, and Melina Bone were staying at a shelter when they decided to take a break and checked into a hotel. On November 3, 2024, they booked a room at a Holiday Inn on Dixon Road and began drinking alcohol. Krystyne Meeches made a comment about the other two getting “smoochie,” which the others took as a homophobic remark and found offensive. Jasmine Dedam grabbed Ms. Meeches by the hair and began punching and kicking her. She also grabbed the phone in the room and began beating Ms. Meeches with it.
4Melina Bone tried to intervene and was punched in response.
5As a result of this severe beating, Krystyne Meeches lay on the floor seemingly unconscious. They threw a sheet over her and left her there overnight. By 8 a.m., she began vomiting blood. An ambulance was called, and she was transported to the hospital. Ms. Meeches had a fractured nose and ribs, along with cuts. She was diagnosed with a fractured orbital bone, hemorrhaging behind an eye, and multiple cuts.
6The nature and extent of these injuries are consistent with prolonged, forceful violence. Jasmine Dedam has acknowledged responsibility for the assault and has admitted to consuming significant amounts of alcohol. I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the assault caused wounding and maiming within the meaning of the Criminal Code and therefore constitutes aggravated assault.
Assault Causing Bodily Harm (December 5, 2024)
7On December 5, 2024, the complainant, Catherine Corbett, had known Jasmine Dedam for approximately one week prior to the incident. At approximately 10:30 a.m., Ms. Dedam attended Ms. Corbett’s residence, where a verbal dispute arose. During the dispute, Ms. Dedam struck Ms. Corbett in the face with punches, prompting Ms. Corbett to call for help. Jasmine Dedam then placed her hands around Ms. Corbett’s neck, impeding breathing. Jasmine Dedam also placed fingers into Ms. Corbett’s mouth during the assault. Police were later called to the scene.
8As a result of the incident, Ms. Corbett sustained injuries, including a broken nose and a cheek laceration. I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Jasmine Dedam intentionally applied force to Ms. Corbett without consent, and that this force caused bodily harm.
Victim Impact Statements
Krystyne Meeches
9Krystyne Meeches’ statement describes a devastating, permanent transformation in her life after a brutal assault that left her with severe physical injuries and lasting psychological trauma.
10Emotionally, she explains that the incident has fundamentally altered her sense of safety and trust in others. She describes living in a constant state of fear and hypervigilance, stating: “It affected my whole life. Not able to trust anybody. Feeling scared to go out… I’m always looking over my shoulder thinking someone’s going to attack me.” This fear is persistent and deeply ingrained. Ms. Meeches acknowledges that the sense of terror is unlikely to dissipate: “I still have the scared feeling in myself and I know that won’t go away any time soon.”
11The physical consequences she describes are severe, life-altering, and ongoing. Ms. Meeches reports that she was abandoned after the assault in critical condition: “I was left on the floor with a sheet over me to die. No one called 911, they left me there over night.” She suffered serious brain trauma, including bleeding and long-term damage: “I get seizures because of the brain trauma I incurred… I could go into a seizure at any time and this is the life that I have to live now.”
12Her recovery has required extensive medical intervention and rehabilitation. She had to relearn basic functions: “I went to a rehabilitation centre to learn how to walk again and talk again” and continues to live with lasting impairments, including vision damage: “My left eye will never be the same… the eyesight will never be the same.” She also describes changes to her speech and physical presentation, noting that she now stutters and experiences involuntary movements, contributing to an altered self-image: “I look at myself in the mirror [and] I see a whole different person.”
13Financially, the assault created significant burdens from recovery-related expenses. Ms. Meeches reports she incurred additional costs for assistive devices and care, including a walker, a cane, specialized footwear, medical supplies, and an emotional support dog recommended by her doctor.
14Overall, Krystyne Meeches’ account portrays a survivor living with permanent neurological injury, significant physical impairment, and persistent psychological distress, while relying heavily on family support to cope with the aftermath.
Catherine Corbett
15Catherine Corbett explains that the trauma has fundamentally changed her, stating: “She also killed an emotional part of me that day… A part of me died.” Her account of the assault underscores the severity of the violence. The psychological aftermath has been severe and persistent.
16Ms. Corbett describes daily anxiety, panic attacks, and an inability to feel safe or resume normal activities. She notes that “my trust in humanity has been shattered” and that she now avoids community spaces and social activities, leading to isolation.
17Physically, Ms. Corbett continues to suffer from significant, ongoing medical issues. She reports post-concussion syndrome with chronic symptoms including “focus, balance, chronic headaches, and migraines,” as well as damage to her throat and a broken nose. She required hospital treatment, diagnostic imaging, and ongoing care, and remains under the supervision of multiple medical professionals. These injuries have had lasting effects on her ability to function, including her capacity to work: “I have not returned to my regular work duties… I have issues concentrating, focusing… dizziness, and nausea.”
Background
18Jasmine Dedam, a 33-year-old Mi’kmaq woman from Elsipogtog First Nation in New Brunswick, is a registered Status Indian. Her family history is deeply influenced by colonial policies that targeted Indigenous peoples in Canada. Many relatives, including her grandmother and several aunts and uncles, attended the Indian Residential School system and Indian Day Schools.
19These institutions' impact extended across generations. Ms. Dedam’s grandmother, a survivor of residential schools, experienced sexual violence and lifelong trauma. An uncle who also attended residential school later died by suicide. Her father, a Sixties Scoop survivor, was removed from his family as a child and placed in foster care, where he encountered racism and neglect. Both parents carried unresolved trauma, influencing their parenting: her father battled addiction and anger, while her mother was frequently physically and emotionally abusive.
20Jasmine Dedam’s childhood was marked by instability, violence, and exposure to widespread sexual abuse within her extended family. Her connection to her Indigenous culture was minimal, shaped by the impact of residential schooling and her mother’s religious beliefs, which discouraged traditional practices. During her youth, she also faced racism at school and, after coming out as a lesbian at 16, encountered homophobia from peers and family, which led to her being banished from her home.
21These shared experiences, such as intergenerational trauma, family violence, cultural disconnection, racism, and social marginalization, led to early substance use, mental health issues like PTSD, depression, and anxiety, as well as instability in education, work, and relationships.
22As an Indigenous woman in an urban setting, she later faced heightened vulnerability to poverty and homelessness, issues that disproportionately affect Indigenous populations due to structural inequalities rooted in colonial history.
23Jasmine Dedam’s criminal conduct occurred in the context of heavy alcohol use, unresolved trauma, and triggers rooted in past experiences, particularly homophobia and violence. The report emphasizes that while she accepts responsibility, these actions cannot be understood in isolation from the systemic and historical disadvantages associated with her Indigenous identity.
24Her recent engagement with Indigenous healing services, sobriety, and cultural reconnection highlights the importance of culturally appropriate responses to both her rehabilitation and broader systemic inequities.
25Disappointingly, I received a letter dated April 16, 2026, stating that despite some good work since her admission to the Thunder Woman Healing Lodge on August 13, 2025, and participation in structured programming focused on personal goal setting, stabilization, and preparation for reintegration into the community, she was discharged on April 8, 2026. She was provided with housing through a multifaith housing agency and would receive limited support from the Thunder Woman Healing Lodge.
Sentencing Circle
26The sentencing circle took place on September 11, 2025, and brought together community and support representatives from Aboriginal Legal Services such as Angie Assinewe, Case Manager; Dorothy Peters, Indigenous Knowledge Keeper and Gladue Report Writer Jasmyne Galley; and a worker from the Thunder Woman Healing Lodge, Andi Vadiou. Additional attendees included Ms. Dedam’s counsel, Leah Gensey; Crown Counsel, Peter Hamm; Krystyne Meeches and several of her family members, including a nephew, Krystyne’s son Dakota, her current partner Elissa, and her ex-partner, John Taylor. Catherine Corbett appeared by audio link.
27The Circle began with a review of the offences committed by Jasmine Dedam. The victim impact statements from Catherine Corbett and Krystyne Meeches were also shared with the Circle. Jasmine Dedam expressed deep shame and regret for her actions. She acknowledged responsibility, stating that there was no excuse for what had occurred. She admitted that alcohol consumption played a significant role in the events and described her efforts to return to sobriety, emphasizing a commitment to never drink again. Ms. Dedam, as an expression of remorse, described the actions as horrible and offered apologies to those harmed.
28Andi Vadiou noted that Jasmine Dedam presents very differently when sober. Jasmyne Galley, the Gladue Report writer, who had known Ms. Dedam for several months, described observing healing and self-reflection since the arrest and stated that, in many long conversations, Ms. Dedam had not appeared to be the same person who committed the assault.
29There was also meaningful input from the victims. Ms. Meeches, who I will note, has been significantly damaged by the violent attack at the hands of Jasmine Dedam, struggled to speak because of the injuries she has suffered. She sustained an apparent brain injury resulting in significant impairments in communication and mobility. Her speech is markedly slowed and slurred and is frequently difficult for unfamiliar listeners to understand. Her physical movement is similarly affected, with reduced mobility and impaired coordination, suggesting limitations in independent functioning.
30Ms. Meeches’ family and friends also provided helpful input to the Circle. Understandably, they are enraged when they see the damage and harm inflicted on their loved one and family member. They spoke of the day-to-day challenges Ms. Meeches faces, including being unable to care for herself without significant support. They spoke of their memories of Krystyne Meeches as a strong woman and how it pained them to see her like this. They all expressed their outrage and demanded justice for Krystyne Meeches. Several expressed anger and disbelief, stating that alcohol was not an excuse and that forgiveness would not be possible for them.
31One family member described how Ms. Meeches can no longer live independently and characterized the injuries as life-altering. A son described the victim’s current condition, noting a profound change and an ongoing inability of Ms. Meeches to care for herself. A niece described how the harm extended beyond the individual victim and affects the entire family and expressed deep anger and difficulty accepting Jasmine Dedam’s apology.
32Grandmother Dorothy Peters, a wise knowledge keeper who works with Aboriginal Legal Services and serves as a cultural touchstone and teacher in many of our sentencing circles, graciously reflected on her experience sitting in many circles and spoke about the difficulty of witnessing the impact of harm on victims, particularly Krystyne Meeches. She emphasized how violence and substance use can take over lives and impact entire families and communities, often creating lasting damage and harm. She acknowledged the pain experienced by both the victims and Jasmine Dedam and the broader ripple effects on families and the community.
33Grandmother Peters also emphasized the need for Jasmine Dedam to be accountable for her actions. She stressed the importance of truth-telling and taking responsibility, noting that healing requires acknowledging one’s role in the harm caused. Dorothy Peters also highlighted that Ms. Dedam would need to rebuild self-respect and respect within the community over time.
34Grandmother Peters explained that unresolved trauma can accumulate over time and lead to harmful actions, especially when combined with alcohol. She encouraged Jasmine Dedam to listen carefully, take responsibility, and view the process as an opportunity to choose a different path. She also stressed that the community was there to support change, but that meaningful change would require commitment and effort.
35Ms. Dedam’s counsel, Leah Gensey, provided background on her client’s time in custody and her recent release to a bail bed at a treatment facility, where Ms. Dedam had been residing for approximately one month. A progress report was referenced, noting participation in programming such as the Medicine Wheel, Alcoholics Anonymous, and Narcotics Anonymous. Andi Vadiou described Ms. Dedam as a positive presence in the lodge, adapting well to group living, engaging openly in discussions, and beginning additional programming, including anger management. Jasmine Dedam was described as working to reconnect with culture and identity.
36Jasmyne Galley noted that Ms. Dedam had experienced significant trauma from a young age and had struggled with instability and substance use over time. Despite this, Galley emphasized Ms. Dedam’s recent efforts to return to the community, reconnect with cultural teachings, and demonstrate courage by participating in the sentencing circle.
37The circle concluded with reflections on the importance of accountability, healing, and ongoing support. Although the harm was described as severe and life-altering, participants also acknowledged Jasmine Dedam’s efforts toward change and the need for a long-term commitment to rehabilitation. The process underscored both the extent of the damage and the collective effort required to move forward.
Thunder Woman Healing Lodge
38Jasmine Dedam’s experience at Thunder Woman Healing Lodge shows a pattern of initial active participation and clear progress, which was later affected by interpersonal issues and ultimately led to her discharge for non-compliance.
39Ms. Dedam entered the program on August 13, 2025, and participated in a range of structured activities, including addiction treatment, anger management, cognitive-behavioural therapy, grief work, and traditional Indigenous practices such as drumming, beading, regalia-making, and medicine harvesting. From the outset, she demonstrated consistent engagement by completing homework, attending counselling sessions, and adhering to house rules. Staff noted her strong commitment, accountability, and willingness to invest in her healing, placing her in the first quadrant of the Medicine Wheel program, which reflects her active engagement and progress.
40Over time, she reached important therapeutic and personal milestones. She completed key projects like a cultural identity presentation on her Mi’kmaq heritage and the effects of colonization across generations, as well as a “loss packet" related to a close friend's suicide. She also gained practical skills in regalia-making, creating and selling items within her community. Through written reflections and exercises like anger logs, she showed increased understanding of how her past trauma, family issues, and substance use are interconnected. Her growth was supported by comprehensive medical and mental health care, including better sleep after new medication and ongoing checks for possible traumatic brain injury.
41Despite her progress, Ms. Dedam continued to encounter significant challenges, especially in her interactions with staff. She found it hard to trust, communicate effectively, and regulate her emotions, often responding defensively when redirected or faced with misunderstandings. These issues were likely connected to her trauma history and potential neurological factors. Although she tried to improve by engaging in conflict resolution and increasing her self-awareness, these relationship difficulties persisted as a recurring concern throughout her stay.
42Initially, her overall trajectory was positive, and staff believed she could continue to grow and planned to support her for a full year to help her reintegrate into the community. However, her progress was hindered by her failure to follow the Lodge’s mandatory program rules, which are vital for ensuring a safe and structured environment. This non-compliance led to her discharge from the program on April 8, 2026.
43At discharge, plans were made to promote continued care and stability. Jasmine Dedam secured housing at a supportive residence and continued to access community supports, such as food assistance and services through the Lodge. Overall, she made significant progress therapeutically and culturally, especially in gaining insight, developing skills, and engaging actively. However, her inconsistent adherence to program expectations resulted in an unsuccessful program completion, despite the meaningful progress she made during her stay.
The Position of the Parties
Crown Position
44The Crown is seeking a total sentence of five years’ imprisonment, with four years for aggravated assault and one year for assault causing bodily harm. They base this request on both the details of the offences and Jamine Dedam’s background, noting that she is relatively young with a criminal record. The crimes involve two notably violent and serious beatings that inflicted significant harm on an Indigenous victim, Krystyne Meeches. The Crown argues that this level of violence is among the most severe, short of murder, and should heavily influence the sentencing decision.
45The Crown emphasizes that the core goals of sentencing, including upholding respect for the law, deterrence, denunciation, separating offenders when necessary, rehabilitation, reparations, and recognizing the harm caused, must all be considered. However, in cases involving serious violence, deterrence and denunciation take precedence. The severity of injuries and their long-term effects on the victim demand a sentence that unmistakably expresses society’s condemnation and assures both the victim and the public that justice has been achieved. Although other sentencing principles remain relevant, the Crown argues that any approach that diminishes the importance of deterrence and denunciation in these situations would be a mistake.
Defence Position
46Counsel argues that Jasmine Dedam has already spent a significant eight months in custody, amounting to a substantial deprivation of liberty. They stress that this pre-sentence detention should carry meaningful weight in the pursuit of a just and proportional sentence. Furthermore, the defence points out Ms. Dedam’s notable rehabilitative potential, evidenced by her progress and conduct at the Lodge, as well as her previous behaviour indicating she can benefit from structured support. It is also contended that her custodial experience has been especially challenging.
47Ms. Gensey, in essence, conceded the need for incarceration, but argued that a term of incarceration in the reformatory range, given the mitigating personal circumstances, would be more appropriate.
Note
48I offered to delay sentencing, originally scheduled for later in 2025, giving Jasmine Dedam the opportunity to build a stronger foundation in recovery through her treatment at Thunder Woman Healing Lodge. The one disadvantage of this opportunity was that Ms. Gensey would be leaving her defence practice at the end of the year, which meant that, should Ms. Dedam agree to the delay, she would have to retain new counsel. Richard Sherman was ultimately retained, and he sought to make further submissions, requesting a conditional sentence.
49Mr. Sherman submitted that an appropriate sentence would be a conditional sentence order of two years less a day, followed by three years’ probation. Defence counsel argued that the Court should not impose a penitentiary sentence of two years or more and submitted that, despite the seriousness of the assaults causing bodily harm and aggravated assault, the sentencing analysis must give primary consideration to the accused’s Indigenous background and the principles set out in s. 718.2(e).
50Counsel suggested that the objectives set out in ss. 718.2(e) and 718.04 may pull in different directions and require careful balancing. While acknowledging the Crown’s request for a significantly longer custodial sentence, counsel noted that even a federal sentence would likely result in parole eligibility after a relatively short period. Counsel argued that a community-based sentence followed by a lengthy probationary term would provide substantial control and supervision over the accused while promoting rehabilitation.
51Counsel pointed to the accused’s participation in the sentencing circle, during which Jasmine Dedam expressed shame, remorse, and regret, acknowledged the harm caused, and did not attempt to excuse the conduct.
Sentencing Principles
52The Criminal Code of Canada, at section 718.2, states:
A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles:
(a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender
53The aggravating and mitigating factors include elements of Jasmine Dedam’s background, the nature of her crimes, the timing of her guilty plea, and any other evidence presented at this sentencing hearing. This also encompasses legal guidance from the Criminal Code and directives from higher courts regarding specific aspects of this case that I must consider. Some of the aggravating circumstances include:
(1) The extent of unrestrained violence inflicted upon Krystyne Meeches was both brutal and prolonged.
(2) After inflicting this violent attack on Ms. Meeches, the decision to throw a sheet over her and to leave her there for the night was particularly cruel and cold-hearted.
(3) The injuries to Krystyne Meeches will have lifelong repercussions and will significantly impact her quality of life.
(4) Jasmine Dedam has a short record with entries from 2016 and 2017 for failing to comply and assault resisting arrest.
(5) This was a violent overreaction to a perceived homophobic slight fueled by alcohol.
(6) Krystyne Meeches is an Indigenous woman. Section 718.04 states:
When a court imposes a sentence for an offence that involved the abuse of a person who is vulnerable because of personal circumstances — including because the person is Aboriginal and female — the court shall give primary consideration to the objectives of denunciation and deterrence of the conduct that forms the basis of the offence.
(7) Just over a month later, Jasmine Dedam violently assaulted Catherine Corbett, with whom she appeared to be in the early stages of a relationship.
(8) The injuries to Catherine Corbett were also significant and she continues to struggle physically and psychologically as a result.
(9) At the time of the offence, Jasmine Dedam and Catherine Corbett were in a short-term intimate relationship. Section 718.201 states:
A court that imposes a sentence in respect of an offence that involved the abuse of an intimate partner shall consider the increased vulnerability of female persons who are victims, giving particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal female victims.
54In mitigation, the following factors are considered:
(1) Jasmine Dedam, as a First Nations woman, is entitled to the remedial consideration accorded to offenders by virtue of section 718.2(e).
(2) Ms. Dedam admitted her guilt and entered guilty pleas, thereby saving court resources and, more importantly, sparing the victims from ending an adversarial court process.
(3) Jasmine Dedam’s Gladue Report recounts an all-too-familiar history of the impact of colonialism, racism, and homophobia on her family’s lives and the intergenerational trauma that so often accompanies those affected. That tragic history of physical, emotional, and religious bigotry necessitates a reduced level of moral culpability.
(4) Ms. Dedam’s prospects for rehabilitation are promising, as she has shown periods of progress and positive movement in her recovery from addiction and anger issues. However, the unfortunate setback of her discharge from treatment at the Thunder Woman Healing Lodge somewhat diminishes the mitigating impact.
Analysis
55In determining an appropriate sentence in this matter, I am guided by the fundamental principle of proportionality: the sentence must reflect both the gravity of the offence and the degree of Ms. Dedam’s responsibility. The gravity of the present offences is exceptionally high. Krystyne Meeches has sustained a traumatic brain injury that will affect her abilities for life. The law consistently treats such injuries as among the most severe outcomes, just below death. As the Court of Appeal observed in R. v. Brouillard, where the victim suffered comparable head trauma, the injuries led to “lifelong deficits,” such that the victim would “always need support… [and] will never be competitively employable”. That description is apt here. The harm extends beyond immediate physical injury and constitutes a profound and permanent loss of autonomy, dignity, and life potential. R. v. Brouillard, 2016 ONCA 342 at para. 21.
56Courts have consistently held that when an offender commits extreme violence causing lasting, life-changing harm, these priorities must take precedence. In R. v. Bolan, Jocko, Wilson, 2022 ONSC 2581 at para. 20, where the victim sustained a traumatic brain injury and was almost left for dead, the Court emphasized that denunciation and deterrence are paramount in sentencing. Likewise, in R. v. Rabbit, 2023 ABCA 170, at para. 23, the sentencing judge described the violence as “near murder,” underscoring the law's serious stance on acts that endanger a victim’s life and long-term well-being. This case clearly falls within that category of severe violence.
Consideration of Vulnerable Victims
57Considering the severity of violence and its aftermath, the main goals of sentencing are denunciation and deterrence. This is further emphasized by the need to apply section 718.04. Recently, the Criminal Code was amended to include a provision requiring judges to consider the heightened vulnerability of Indigenous women to violence. Under section 718.04, courts must prioritize denunciation and deterrence in such cases. This section was added to address the disproportionate victimization of Indigenous women in Canada, partly in response to findings from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, which highlights the importance of understanding this context.
58The Inquiry highlighted that colonial and patriarchal policies removed Indigenous women from their traditional community and governance roles. These policies reduced their social status, caused intergenerational trauma, and led to ongoing marginalization manifesting as poverty, unstable housing or homelessness, and difficulties accessing education, employment, healthcare, and cultural resources. As a result, Indigenous women became more susceptible to violence. Additionally, the Inquiry discovered that Indigenous victims face discrimination from systems designed to support them, such as police, healthcare providers, and courts.
59As the Supreme Court in R. v. Barton pointed out:
… Indigenous persons have suffered a long history of colonialism, the effects of which continue to be felt. There is no denying that Indigenous people — and in particular Indigenous women, girls, and sex workers — have endured serious injustices, including high rates of sexual violence against women:.
R. v. Barton, 2019 SCC 33, [2019] 2 SCR 579 at para. 198
60In Barton, the Supreme Court examined how racist and sexist stereotypes about Indigenous women have tainted the justice system. The Court emphasized the need to remain vigilant against prejudiced assumptions that affect Indigenous women, especially those who are vulnerable due to poverty, addiction, marginalization, or involvement in the sex trade. The case revealed that Indigenous women are too often denied equal dignity and protection under the law.
61I must apply s.718.04 to address the confidence crisis among Indigenous women and communities regarding the criminal justice system, alongside other principles and objectives. This requires considering relevant aggravating and mitigating factors, some of which are explicitly codified, such as recognizing evidence of a significant impact on the victim in this case as an aggravating factor.
62I also recognize the need for deterrence and denunciation in cases of domestic violence. The scourge of domestic violence has plagued our community, and we see the detrimental impact it has on women, children and families.
Gladue Considerations
63Jasmine Dedam is a First Nations Indigenous woman, as is one of the complainants. The evidence establishes the presence of systemic and background factors that must be considered in assessing moral blameworthiness. It is well established that these factors may diminish an offender’s moral culpability and must meaningfully inform the proportionality analysis. The Court of Appeal in R. v. Rabbit, 2023 ABCA 170, at para. 38, stressed that sentencing judges must undertake “a fair and informed understanding of the degree of responsibility of the Indigenous offender”. I have done so here.
64R. v. Rabbit reminds us that we must give real weight to the review of the impact of colonialism and racist systemic laws and practices that have historically and continue to severely disadvantage Indigenous women, men, and communities. Their impact is reflected in the over-representation of members of that community in the child welfare and criminal justice systems, among many other factors that lead to increased poverty, substance abuse, mental health challenges, and significant loss of culture and traditions.
47To apply s 718.2(e), sentencing judges must try to understand what influenced an Indigenous offender to act in the way he did. It also includes assessing whether one’s instinctive reaction to that conduct would be the same, given the circumstances, if the offender were of a different race, culture, or background. This analysis involves empathy, imagination, and introspection, among other things. It imposes on the sentencing judge the difficult task of imagining a different life, and honestly asking how a person – not the world’s strongest or most resilient person – might be affected by such an experience.
R. v. Rabbit, 2023 ABCA 170, at para. 47
65It is equally well established that Gladue considerations do not replace the need to impose a sentence that accurately reflects the seriousness of a violent offence and the harm caused to the victim. The same court warned that sentencing cannot “ignore the seriousness of the offences and the harm done to the victim.” R. v. Rabbit, 2023 ABCA 170, at para. 31. In cases of severe violence and devastating injuries, the mitigating effects of systemic factors, though valid, are necessarily limited. The law mandates that the final sentence must be proportionate to both the level of harm and Ms. Dedam’s degree of responsibility.
66The presence of an Indigenous complainant highlights the wider social context of such violence. The Court must recognize that Indigenous communities face higher rates of victimization and incarceration. Gladue principles should not minimize the severe harm done to an Indigenous victim. Rather, it calls for a careful weaving of Ms. Dedam’s reduced moral blameworthiness with the substantial injuries and serious harm experienced by the complainants, especially Krystyne Meeches as an Indigenous woman.
The Intersection of Criminal Code ss. 718.2(e) and 718.04: Distinct Threads in a Common Fabric of Restorative Justice
67The relationship between ss. 718.2(e) and 718.04 of the Criminal Code should not be seen as conflicting sentencing directives. Instead, they are complementary measures addressing different aspects of the same historical issue: the lasting effects of colonialism on Indigenous peoples within Canada's criminal justice system. Section 718.2(e) targets the overrepresentation of Indigenous men and women as accused persons and offenders, while s. 718.04 focuses on the vulnerability of Indigenous women and girls as victims of violence and exploitation. Both sections reflect Parliament's acknowledgment that formal equality has not resulted in justice for Indigenous communities and that true justice requires courts to consider systemic harm.
68Section 718.2(e) directs sentencing judges to consider “all available sanctions other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances” for all offenders, “with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders.” The section emphasizes that judges must acknowledge the disturbing aspects of Canada’s history, particularly the long-lasting harms stemming from colonization.
69A lens of substantive equality is required when sentencing Indigenous people who have offended to acknowledge, as the Supreme Court did in R. v. Sharma, 2022 SCC 39, “(t)he overrepresentation of Indigenous people in Canada’s prisons is a present-day product of this country’s colonial past” at para. 114.
70The Supreme Court also determined that the section obligates judges to consider their own perceptions of jail and its effectiveness when sentencing Indigenous individuals. In paragraph 57 of Gladue, the Court noted:
Thus, it may be seen that although imprisonment is intended to serve the traditional sentencing goals of separation, deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation, there is widespread consensus that imprisonment has not been successful in achieving some of these goals. Overincarceration is a long-standing problem that has been many times publicly acknowledged but never addressed in a systematic manner by Parliament. In recent years, compared to other countries, sentences of imprisonment in Canada have increased at an alarming rate. The 1996 sentencing reforms embodied in Part XXIII, and s.718.2(e) in particular, must be understood as a reaction to the overuse of prison as a sanction, and must accordingly be given appropriate force as remedial provisions.
71The Court explained that incarceration has been ineffective in this regard because “as has been emphasized repeatedly in studies and commission reports, aboriginal offenders are, as a result of these unique systemic and background factors, more adversely affected by incarceration and less likely to be “rehabilitated” thereby, because the internment milieu is often culturally inappropriate and regrettably discrimination towards them is so often rampant in penal institutions”: at para. 68.
72Section 718.04, added in 2019, highlights a different aspect of the same history by requiring courts to prioritize denunciation and deterrence when sentencing offences involving vulnerable individuals, such as Aboriginal women and girls. This recognizes the severe violence faced by Indigenous women and girls and aims to ensure that sentencing reflects the gravity of these crimes.
73At first glance, some might see a conflict between ss. 718.2(e) and 718.04. One promotes restraint and careful consideration of Indigenous offenders, while the other emphasizes denunciation and deterrence, especially when vulnerable victims, such as Indigenous women, are involved. However, viewing these provisions as conflicting misrepresents their goals. They address different aspects of colonial injustice and aim to restore fairness where the justice system has historically failed Indigenous peoples.
74Think of these remedial sections to address failures in the criminal justice system as a woven fabric, where each thread has a specific role, but together they create strength and protection. Section 718.2(e) is one thread, intended to remedy the harms leading to the disproportionate criminalization and incarceration of Indigenous people. Section 718.04 is another, emphasizing the heightened vulnerability and victimization faced by Indigenous women. Both threads are equally important; together, they reflect a broader dedication to restorative and substantive justice.
75Indeed, Gladue was never intended simply to reduce sentences. The Court emphasized that the provision sought a “different method of analysis,” one that examines the relationship between the individual offender and broader social forces. The focus is on achieving a fit sentence that accounts for both individual responsibility and systemic context.
76Similarly, s. 718.04 is not merely punitive. Its purpose is to acknowledge harms that have historically been minimized or ignored. When courts denounce violence against Indigenous women, they affirm not only the dignity of individual victims but also the security and integrity of Indigenous communities that have long borne the consequences of such violence.
77Both provisions rest on the recognition that colonialism has caused interconnected harms. The history of displacement, residential schools, family disruption, poverty, racism, and marginalization identified in Gladue, Ipeelee and Barton, contributes both to the overrepresentation of Indigenous persons as offenders and to the disproportionate victimization of Indigenous women.
78This connection is important. Indigenous people do not experience these harms in separate categories. An accused person may also be a victim of systemic violence, and an Indigenous woman who has been victimized is often part of a family and community affected by the same historical forces discussed in Gladue and Ipeelee. Sentencing must therefore recognize these interconnected realities.
79From this perspective, a sentencing judge is not choosing between the interests of Indigenous offenders and Indigenous victims. Rather, the task is to impose a principled sentence that accounts for both. The remedial purpose of s. 718.2(e) remains fully engaged, while s. 718.04 ensures that the victimization of Indigenous women receives the weight Parliament intended. Neither principle can be subordinated; both must be reconciled within the broader framework of proportionality and individualized sentencing.
80Giving meaningful effect to both provisions requires that neither displace the other. Gladue and Ipeelee require courts to address the systemic factors that bring Indigenous persons before the criminal justice system. Barton requires courts to confront the stereotypes and indifference that have historically devalued Indigenous women. Together, these authorities reflect an effort to account for the full spectrum of colonial harms.
81To diminish s. 718.2(e) to give effect to s. 718.04 would undermine established sentencing principles and effectively treat increased incarceration of Indigenous offenders as the primary response to the victimization of Indigenous women.
82Both provisions aim for comprehensive restorative justice, which goes beyond merely lowering incarceration rates or condemning violence through increased incarceration. It focuses on repairing relationships, recognizing historical truths, encouraging accountability, and reinforcing communities. For Indigenous peoples, genuine restorative justice must address the needs of victims, the accused, and communities affected by centuries of colonial disruption.
83In that sense, ss. 718.2(e) and 718.04 are best understood not as competing remedies pulling sentencing in opposite directions, but as distinct threads woven into a common fabric. Together, the guidance provided by Gladue, Ipeelee, and Barton reflects an evolving effort to build a criminal justice system that recognizes the lived realities of Indigenous peoples and responds to those realities with fairness, dignity, and genuine reconciliation.
Conclusion
84I accept that the four-year sentence sought by the Crown on the aggravated assault and one year on the assault causing bodily harm falls within the range of sentences for aggravated assault, particularly in cases involving catastrophic injury, as was inflicted on Krystyne Meeches because of the assault. I recognize that Krystyne Meeches, as an Indigenous woman, is particularly vulnerable, and I note the need to place a prominent focus on deterrence and denunciation in sentencing Jasmine Dedam. I also accept that the assault causing bodily harm to her short-term domestic partner, Catherine Corbett, which resulted in serious injury and significantly affected her physically and emotionally, is seriously aggravating.
85But it is incumbent on me to also consider both the systemic factors and the background that Jasmine Dedam experienced. Both sides of her family experienced Indian Residential Schools or Day Schools, resulting in significant intergenerational trauma, including neglect and violence, religious bigotry imposed by Christian beliefs, and the loss of cultural traditions. This trauma led to her being disowned by her family when she came out in her teens.
86She also faced significant racism and hatred in the broader community when she attended school off reserve, compounding the violence and struggles she faced at home. She began to cope with these stressors by drinking alcohol and was later diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and major depression.
87I also recognize that she has made significant progress in her rehabilitation, having engaged in treatment for about eight months. At the time of sentencing submissions, she had been sober since December 2024. However, the circumstances surrounding her discharge from the Thunder Woman Healing Lodge have tainted her prospects. This is not aggravating in and of itself, but it does diminish the impact of her rehabilitative steps as a mitigating factor.
88I am also mindful that, as an Indigenous lesbian woman, Jasmine Dedam has been a victim of violence, racism, and homophobia, as the Gladue report makes clear. It is a burden she bears as she now faces the repercussions of her actions in inflicting violence against two women, one a domestic partner and the other a vulnerable Indigenous woman who is now seriously damaged by Ms. Dedam’s actions.
89Our criminal justice system has failed Indigenous victims and offenders. That truth is undeniable. It’s also crucial to remember that, despite our efforts in the Toronto Gladue Court to address the cultural needs of the Indigenous community through practices such as smudging, creating space for and incorporating ceremonies when appropriate, and showcasing Indigenous art in our environment, this is not Indigenous Justice. The tools we use are the same as those we have always relied on, found in the Criminal Code. We are simply trying to approach things differently, to make justice more meaningful, respectful, and kind.
90I believe it is safe to say that if Indigenous people were designing their own justice system, it would look very different from what we are doing now. I long for a criminal justice system that allows for restorative justice alternatives or programs that mandate and support people in making real efforts to heal themselves, whether as victims, offenders, or community members. Land-based programs that support traditional cultural practices by acknowledging and healing the harm of colonialism and that help restore participants and communities to a safer place, where people can accept responsibility and be liberated from their traumas in a safe and secure manner. Culturally appropriate programs that truly work to ensure they can realistically avoid facing the same harm and actions that led them to have to face justice in the first place.
91However, we are bound by the criminal justice system we have, by the Criminal Code, and by the precedents of our courts. In those circumstances, and for the reasons noted above, notwithstanding my acknowledgment of the harm that incarceration may cause you I find that I must impose a period of incarceration. As stated in paragraph 31 of Rabbit, when it comes down to imposing a sentence for these offences, I cannot ignore the seriousness of the offences and the harm done to the victims.
92I recognize that I am adding yet another Indigenous woman to the custodial population, increasing the over 50% representation of Indigenous women in custody in Canada even though Indigenous people are but 5% of the population, according to Statistics Canada[1].
93In the circumstances of this case, considering the harshness of the violence and the decidedly cruel decision to leave Krystyne Meeches lying on the floor, covered in blood and seriously injured, and just throwing a sheet over her so she could continue drinking, on the aggravated assault, I will impose a sentence of 2 ½ years. For the assault causing bodily harm against Catherine Corbett, I will impose a sentence of 8 months, consecutive, for a total sentence of 3 years, 2 months. I note that you have spent 254 days in pre-trial custody. Summers credit would bring that to 380 days, or 1 year and 15 days. I will grant you a further 45 days of Duncan credit for the ongoing crisis in provincial institutions, which has led to frequent lockdowns due to staff shortages. These lockdowns severely limit access to programming and yard time, making pre-trial custody significantly harsher.
94The remaining time in custody will be 2 years. There will also be a DNA order, which is primary, and a section 109 for 10 years.
Restitution
95Considering materials filed by Catherine Corbett, I will order a stand-alone restitution order in the amount of $3000.00.
96Despite a lack of materials supporting her claim, except for $3,562 for eyeglasses and an emotional support animal, I am ordering stand-alone restitution in the amount of $7,500.00 to Krystyne Meeches. It is obvious that her needs and deficits would have posed a challenge in gathering materials to present to the Court in support of a claim for restitution. But it is also plainly obvious to the Court that she will require significant supports and assistive devices, and care workers for much of her life. I am satisfied, in the circumstances, that an order for $7,500.00 barely meets the financial stress she will face.
Released: July 8, 2026
Signed: Justice André Chamberlain
1https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/220921/dq220921a-eng.htm?indid=32990-1&indgeo=0