WARNING

The court hearing this matter directs that the following notices be attached to the file:

This is a case under the Youth Criminal Justice Act and is subject to subsections 110(1) and 111(1) and section 129 of the Act. These provisions read as follows:

110. IDENTITY OF OFFENDER NOT TO BE PUBLISHED — (1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a young person, or any other information related to a young person, if it would identify the young person as a young person dealt with under this Act.

111. IDENTITY OF VICTIM OR WITNESS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED — (1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a child or young person, or any other information related to a child or a young person, if it would identify the child or young person as having been a victim of, or as having appeared as a witness in connection with, an offence committed or alleged to have been committed by a young person.

129. NO SUBSEQUENT DISCLOSURE — No person who is given access to a record or to whom information is disclosed under this Act shall disclose that information to any person unless the disclosure is authorized under this Act.

Subsection 138(1) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, which deals with the consequences of failure to comply with these provisions, states as follows:

138. OFFENCES — Every person who contravenes subsection 110(1) (identity of offender not to be published), 111(1) (identity of victim or witness not to be published) . . . or section 129 (no subsequent disclosure) . . .

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Court Information

Ontario Court of Justice Youth Justice Court

Date: September 25, 2025 Location: Newmarket

Between: His Majesty the King — and — R.S.V.

Sentencing

Heard and Delivered: September 25, 2025

Counsel:

• Ms. Thariza Ganeshamoorthy, Ms. Lilah Vassilenko — counsel for the Crown
• Mr. Saad Amjad — counsel for the defendant

Decision

KENKEL J.:

Introduction

[1] The complainant was followed by a group of six young men and one young woman from the Scarborough Town Centre onto a bus headed to Vaughan. The group split up into two, one behind and one in front of the complainant. Both groups watched him and exchanged signals pointing as he got up to leave at one of the last stops.

[2] All the young men were fully masked. They exited and attacked the complainant, robbing him of an expensive coat at knifepoint. RSV and his associates kept beating the victim even after the coat was surrendered. The complainant was taken to hospital afterwards. He suffered a concussion which kept him out of school for 4 or 5 months. He lost his academic year. He just recently returned to school.

[3] Mr. RSV was convicted at trial of Robbery contrary to s 343 of the Criminal Code.

Aggravating Circumstances

[4] There are several features that aggravate sentence:

• the robbery was a planned attack, coordinated with others,
• the use of the knife during the robbery, although the complainant was not stabbed or cut and RSV did not use the knife,
• the significant impact of the offence on the victim's health and financial circumstances,
• the impact of a violent robbery on the community, particularly where the victim was stalked while on public transportation.

Mitigating Circumstances

[5] The pre-sentence report and the young person's letter to the victim at the time of sentence show a number of mitigating factors:

• RSV has no record,
• he has the support of his family and positive social engagement,
• he attends school and works part-time,
• he has expressed remorse and now has insight into his offence.

[6] RSV's comment in the Pre-Sentence Report that he tried to convince his friends to leave at the time finds no support in the trial evidence including the bus video and the video of the attack. His letter to the victim marked as Exhibit 2 on sentence shows a much better appreciation of the circumstances.

[7] The impact of violence with knives was directly brought home to RSV three months after this robbery. He was stabbed four times in an unrelated incident. His recovery was difficult physically and mentally.

[8] RSV was cooperative with the pre-sentence interview. He is open to participating in rehabilitative programs.

The Submissions of Counsel

[9] The Crown and defence jointly submit that a sentence of 18 months probation is appropriate in the circumstances with ancillary firearms prohibition and DNA orders.

The Sentence

[10] The purpose of sentencing under the Youth Criminal Justice Act SC 2002 c 1 (YCJA) is to hold a young person accountable for an offence through the imposition of just sanctions that have meaningful consequences for the young person and promote his rehabilitation thereby contributing to the long-term protection of the public. The sentencing principles in s 38(2) and (3) of the YCJA require a review of several factors including the proportionality of the sentence having regard to the seriousness of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the young person, and consideration of the harm done to the victim. Section 38(2)(d) requires all available sanctions other than custody be considered and s 38(2)(e)(i) directs that the least restrictive sentence compatible with the purpose of sentencing be imposed.

[11] The circumstances of this planned, violent robbery and its effect on the victim and the community would typically require consideration of the various sanctions beyond probation as set out in section 42(2). A sentence of probation would include community service as a means of accomplishing the important sentencing objectives set out in the YCJA. Here the defence and Crown jointly submit a period of probation with no provision for community service. The only positive act required by the proposed order is "counselling" undefined.

[12] Considering all of the circumstances, while I acknowledge that other sanctions and probation terms would better meet the specific concerns in this case and the purpose and principles of sentence, the jointly submitted sentence is not unfit. Accordingly, Mr. RSV will be placed on probation for 18 months with the following conditions:

• Report to probation by phone or in-person within 48 hours and thereafter as required.
• Reside at address approved of by probation.
• Take any counselling as required.
• Attend school or maintain employment.
• No contact with the co-accuseds and victim as named by the Crown.
• Not to be within 100m of any known place of residence, employment or education of the co-accuseds or the victim.
• Not possess any weapons as defined by the Criminal Code.

[13] There is a mandatory order under s 51(1) of the YCJA prohibiting the young person from possessing any firearm, cross-bow, prohibited weapon, restricted weapon, prohibited device, ammunition, prohibited ammunition or explosive substance for 2 years.

[14] I've considered RSV's current circumstances as a young person along with the circumstances of the violent robbery. I find it necessary in the public interest to order that you provide a sample of your DNA for registration on the national databank.

Delivered: September 25, 2025.

Justice Joseph F. Kenkel