Patrizia Colavecchia

D.L. pleaded guilty to sexual interference and manufacturing child pornography involving his stepdaughter, A.W., who was 13-15 years old during the prolonged abuse.

The court considered aggravating factors including a profound breach of trust, sexual grooming, the graphic nature of the manufactured child sexual exploitation videos, the variety and prolonged period of sexual activity, and the use of bondage.

Mitigating factors included an early guilty plea and a forensic risk assessment indicating a "below average risk to reoffend sexually," though the offender showed diminished insight.

The court applied the principles from R. v. Friesen regarding upward departure from dated sentencing ranges for child sexual abuse and the non-mitigating nature of victim participation.

Despite the Crown's initial proposed range of 8-10 years, the court imposed a global custodial term of 8 years, comprising 6.5 years for sexual interference and 18 months consecutive for manufacturing child pornography, balancing totality and restraint given the pre-plea Crown position and recent appellate guidance.

The offender pleaded guilty to publication of intimate images without consent contrary to s. 162.1(1) of the Criminal Code.

The offender and victim were in an intimate relationship.

The victim initially consented to some video recordings for private viewing only.

The offender subsequently placed hidden cameras, continued posting videos online despite the victim's objections, and posted intimate images on multiple websites with the victim's full name and contact information.

The victim received over 300 calls or messages in response to an escort advertisement posted by the offender.

Eleven videos were discovered online, many viewed over 10,000 times.

The court accepted a joint submission for 18 months imprisonment and 3 years probation.

The defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of breach of probation and was found not guilty of four additional counts following a three-day trial.

The defendant had been charged with child pornography offences in 2013 and 2014, and was released on conditions prohibiting attendance at public parks where children under 16 were present.

The breaches involved attending Canada's Wonderland, the Toronto Zoo, and a public park with his girlfriend's two children.

The Crown sought two years less a day; the defence sought 30 to 45 days.

The court imposed a sentence of five months imprisonment concurrent on each count, followed by 24 months probation with conditions including counselling and employment requirements.

The defendant was charged with seven counts of breach of probation.

He pleaded guilty to three counts involving attendance at public parks or swimming areas where persons under 16 years were present.

The trial concerned the interpretation of bail conditions, specifically whether the defendant breached paragraph 5 of his release order by attending the Toronto Zoo, Canada's Wonderland, a cottage in Thornbury, and a local park while in the company of T.M. and her children under 16 years of age.

The Crown argued the defendant could not be in the company of T.M. when she had children under 16 present.

The defendant argued that if he was in the company of any of the other named persons in the release order, the exception to house arrest would apply.

The court found the defendant not guilty of all four remaining counts, holding that paragraph 5 was a provision dealing with house arrest exceptions, not a general prohibition on being in the company of children under 16 years.