This is a sentencing decision for R.H., who pleaded guilty to sexual interference against his biological daughter, aged 7-11, between 2017 and 2021.
The incidents involved repeated sexual abuse and a significant breach of trust by the father.
Aggravating factors included the victim's young age, the egregious breach of trust, the repeated nature of the offending, and the profound impact on the victim.
Mitigating factors included the offender's guilty plea, genuine remorse, lack of a proven criminal record (treated as a first offender), good post-offence conduct, a personal history of depression and childhood sexual abuse, collateral consequences, and significant rehabilitative efforts, including therapy and a low risk of re-offending assessment.
The Crown sought a three-year penitentiary sentence, while the defence proposed a conditional sentence or intermittent jail.
The court, applying principles from R. v. Friesen (emphasizing denunciation and deterrence for child sexual offences) and R. v. C.B. (allowing for consideration of mitigating factors and rehabilitation), determined that a conditional or intermittent sentence was unfit.
The judge imposed a two-year penitentiary sentence, noting it was a significant departure from typical sentences for such offences but justified by the numerous mitigating factors and the offender's rehabilitative progress.