Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CR-18-50 DATE: 2020/01/09 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN M. Mazurski, for the Crown Crown

- and -

C.A. A. Perrin, for the Accused Accused

HEARD: December 12, 2019

Ellies R.S.J.

REASONS FOR DECISION

PUBLICATION RESTRICTION NOTICE

By court order made under subsection 486.4(1) of the Criminal Code, no information that might identify the person described in this judgment as the complainant shall be published, broadcast or transmitted in any manner. This judgment complies with this restriction so that it can be published.

Overview

[1] The accused has pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting his two step-daughters, C.F. and T.A. The Crown and the defence jointly submit that he should be incarcerated for a period of six years. Both sides agree that the facts are aggravating, in a legal sense, and reprehensible, in a moral one. However, they ask the court to consider several mitigating factors in deciding whether to accept the joint submission.

Facts

[2] I will begin with the facts.

[3] The victims are now 19 and 17 years old, respectively. They suffered similar fates at the hands of the accused. When C.F. was about 10 years old, the accused began having vaginal intercourse with her. He also had her fellate him. The intercourse became a frequent occurrence. When she became old enough to bear children, the accused began to have anal intercourse with C.F., to prevent pregnancy. The assaults occurred at various locations, mainly around the home in which the family lived.

[4] In order to get what he wanted, the accused would often offer C.F. money.

[5] The assaults continued until C.F. was about 17 years old.

[6] T.A. was about 12 years old when the accused first asked her to masturbate him. The assaults against T.A. progressed first to vaginal intercourse and then to anal intercourse, in the same way they did with C.F. Like the assaults against C.F., the offences against T.A. were committed at a number of locations, mostly around the family home. However, there is evidence that at least one incident of anal intercourse with T.A. involved more violence than the evidence reveals about the occasions on which the accused had anal intercourse with C.F. On this occasion, the accused held T.A. down in the bathroom where she had been preparing to take a shower.

[7] The assaults against T.A. ended in April 2017 with a similar incident, in which the accused had anal intercourse with her when she was in the washroom brushing her teeth.

[8] The offences came to light in May 2017 as a result of something C.F. said at school. The police began an investigation, following which the accused was charged with 10 sexual offences against the complainants. With the consent of the Crown, he entered pleas to two of them.

Impact on the Victims

[9] C.F. has been more willing to share the effect these assaults have had upon her than T.A. has been. However, I need no evidence in order to find that the crimes perpetrated upon these young women have harmed them significantly. These consequences are well-known and well-accepted in the jurisprudence: R. v. D.D. (2002), 58 O.R. (3d) 788 (Ont. C.F.), at paras. 36-38. They include the possibility that neither of them will be able to form healthy, loving relationships with another adult or even with their own children – something of which no one should be deprived.

Submissions

[10] Both the Crown and the defence submit that the accused should be incarcerated for a period of six years. They acknowledge that such a sentence would be on the very low end of the appropriate range of sentence based on the facts of this case. Indeed, it would be below the appropriate range, which would ordinarily be a sentence in the upper single-digit to low double-digit range: D.D., at para. 32. However, they ask me to consider four main factors in support of their submission.

[11] First, they point out that the accused has no criminal record. They also point out that he admitted during the police investigation that C.F. was not lying. They highlight that the victims were spared the ordeal of a fulsome cross-examination at the preliminary inquiry. Finally, they emphasize that the accused has pleaded guilty before trial.

Analysis

[12] Of these factors, the most important, in my view, is the plea of guilty. As I have said before, as recently as yesterday during another sentencing hearing, it is hard to overstate the importance of a plea of guilty by an accused in crimes like these. It is true, as counsel submit, that a plea of guilty spares the victims the ordeal of testifying at trial. However, more importantly, an acknowledgement of guilt by the perpetrator offers the victims the kind of validation that cannot come from a trial, even where the accused is eventually found guilty.

[13] In so many cases involving the sexual abuse of a child by an adult, families are torn apart. This case is no different. As the Crown stated, the victims' mother has been trying to support her daughters while remaining supportive of her husband. Where an accused fails to acknowledge his guilt, doubts about his guilt often linger in the minds of family members, even if those same doubts do not linger in the minds of the judge or members of the jury.

[14] I need not point out that, where a guilty accused is acquitted after a trial, the family may suffer even more. So, too, may the judge or jury members, who may find themselves in the unenviable position of having to acquit an accused based on the concept of reasonable doubt, even where they suspect that he may have committed the crimes alleged.

[15] But a plea of guilty by an accused spares all of the participants in the trial process the consequences I have mentioned.

[16] In placing such significance on the accused's pleas of guilty in this case, I also bear in mind how difficult it must be for the accused to admit such reprehensible conduct, especially knowing that, at best, he will go to prison for six years and be branded a child abuser for most, if not the rest, of his life. I see the act of pleading guilty as a sign that the accused is truly remorseful and that there is hope for his rehabilitation.

Conclusion

[17] For these reasons, I accept the joint submission. In order to arrive at a global sentence of six years and still comply with the provisions of s. 718.3(7)(d) of the Criminal Code, I sentence you to a period of incarceration of three years on count 1 involving C.F. and a further period of incarceration of three years on count 10 involving T.A., consecutive to the sentence on count 1.

[18] In addition, ancillary orders will be made as follows: (1) you shall provide a sample of your DNA under s. 487.051 of the Criminal Code; (2) you shall be registered under the Sex Offender Information Registration Act for the period prescribed by that statute, pursuant to s. 490.012 of the Criminal Code; (3) pursuant to s. 109 of the Criminal Code, you shall be prohibited from possessing any firearm, ammunition or other thing referred to in that section for a period of 10 years; and (4) pursuant to s. 743.21 of the Criminal Code, you are prohibited from communicating directly or indirectly with C.F. or T.A. during the custodial period of your sentence.

Ellies R.S.J. Released: January 9, 2020