R. v. Senior, 2022 ONSC 136

COURT FILE NO.: CR-19-02612-0000

DATE: 20220120

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

– and –

RICHARD SENIOR

Peter Scrutton and Mabel Lai, for the Crown

John Struthers and Ashli Pinnock, for Richard Senior

HEARD: December 14, 2021

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

CHRISTIE j.

Overview and Facts

[1] Following a 10-day judge alone trial, for lengthy written reasons provided on April 21, 2021, published as R. v. Senior, 2021 ONSC 2729, this court found as follows:

a. Count 1 – theft – guilty, but only as it relates to the $300 payment to the Sherry Wafer source;

b. Count 2 – utter forged document – guilty;

c. Count 3 – utter forged documents – guilty, but only as it relates to the payment form attributed to David Broadhead;

d. Count 4 – unauthorized use of computer – guilty, but only as it relates to Henry Wong;

e. Count 5 – breach of trust – guilty, but only as it relates to Henry Wong;

f. Count 6 – possessing a firearm obtained by crime – guilty, both at the time of placing it in the van and afterward;

g. Count 7 – weapons dangerous – guilty;

h. Count 8 – attempted robbery – not guilty;

i. Count 9 – traffic cocaine by offer – guilty, as it relates to George Papoutsos and Henry Wong only;

j. Count 10 – breach of trust – not guilty;

k. Count 11 – trafficking (Timerbulatov) – not guilty;

l. Count 12 – trafficking (UC1) – guilty;

m. Count 13 – unauthorized use of computer – guilty, but only as it relates to Azeez /Hatzes, Fraser/Mansour, and Simona Marra; and

n. Count 14 – breach of trust –guilty, but only as it relates to Azeez / Hatzes and Fraser/Mansour

[2] Following a four-day entrapment application, this court stayed counts 1, 2 and 3. Detailed reasons for this decision can be found published as R. v. Senior, 2021 ONSC 7254, released on November 10, 2021.

[3] Therefore, this sentencing relates to the remaining eight counts.

[4] At the relevant time, Richard Senior was a Constable with the York Regional Police (“YRP”), assigned to the 5 District Community Oriented Response Unit (“5COR”) in Markham. He had held this position for approximately 15 years, with a focus on traffic enforcement for much of his career.

[5] In both of its earlier judgments, this court referred to the facts in detail and does not propose to repeat those findings. In brief, the charges were in relation to allegations stemming from a YRP suspected police corruption investigation, known as Project Tadeu, which involved the deployment of two undercover officers, UC1 and UC2 (operating under the pseudonym Henry Wong). The eight counts can be grouped into four events as follows:

a. Counts 4 and 5 – Unauthorized Use of Computer and Breach of Trust – Cst. Senior accessed a police computer database to run a licence plate number at the request of Henry Wong, who he believed to be a mid-level Asian organized crime figure involved in the drug business, and provided the results to him. Cst. Senior was advised that Henry wanted this information to “rip” drugs from a rival drug dealer.

b. Counts 6, 7, and 9 - The Drug Warehouse – Cst. Senior was preparing to rob a drug warehouse that Henry Wong had advised him about, in which he anticipated there would be several kilograms of cocaine and cash. In anticipation of finding cocaine, Cst. Senior offered to traffic the cocaine he expected to find in the warehouse, in kilogram quantities, to George Papoutsos and Henry Wong. Also, in preparation for this robbery, Cst. Senior took a loaded YRP shotgun from a YRP vehicle and placed it in the back of a rental van that was parked in a public parking lot.

c. Count 12 – Trafficking Schedule IV substances - Cst. Senior trafficked $400 worth of Schedule IV substances to UC1, including three liquid vials of steroids and a box of tablets, specifically:

• CDSA Schedule IV 23. (22) Metandienone;

• CDSA Schedule IV 23. An anabolic steroid namely, Testosterone enanthate;

• CDSA Schedule IV 23. An anabolic steroid namely, Testosterone enanthate;

• CDSA Schedule IV 23. An anabolic steroid namely, Nandrolone Decanoate

d. Counts 13 and 14 - Cst. Senior improperly accessed (on three occasions) and disclosed (on two occasions) confidential information from CPIC and YRP databases to friends and acquaintances.

Position of the Parties

[6] The positions of the parties as to the appropriate sentence are very far apart.

[7] The Crown suggested a global sentence of 12 years as follows:

a. Count 4, unauthorized use of computer: 3 years

b. Count 5, breach of trust: 3 years concurrent with count 4

c. Count 6, possession of firearm obtained by crime: 4 years consecutive to count 4

d. Count 7: weapons dangerous: 4 years concurrent with count 6

e. Count 9: traffic cocaine: 5 years consecutive

f. Count 12: traffic steroids: 3 months concurrent (totality)

g. Count 13: unauthorized use of computer: 3 months concurrent (totality)

h. Count 14: breach of trust: 3 months concurrent (totality)

The Crown also requested ancillary orders, including a s. 109 weapons prohibition and a DNA order, in addition to a disposition order.

[8] The defence did not take issue with any of the ancillary orders. With respect to time in custody, the defence requested a sentence of less than 5 years, with no further specificity.

Background of Cst. Richard Senior

[9] Richard Senior did not wish to have a pre-sentence report prepared. The background of which this court is aware has been pieced together from character letters that were filed by the defence as part of this sentencing.

[10] Cst. Senior’s mother, Marguerite Senior, immigrated to Canada in the early 1970s with her then husband, Keith Senior. Keith Senior had been transferred by Scotiabank from Wall Street in New York to Toronto as a manager. In Ontario, Marguerite Senior developed into a successful realtor.

[11] Richard Senior is 47 years old, having been born in Toronto on March 17, 1974.

[12] At some point, Richard Senior’s parents separated, and his father moved to Jamaica. Cst. Senior stayed with his mother in Canada.

[13] Cst. Senior has no siblings, but appears to have a close relationship with three step-siblings who are like brothers and sisters to him. As a child, he was outgoing and had his share of friends. His mother was “strict” and encouraged him to bring his friends home whenever possible. As a child, he was described as loving and playful. He was an average student but loved school. Cst. Senior spent most of his summers, when not at camp, either in Jamaica with his father, or in the United States with his mother’s sister and her two sons. Cst. Senior also spent many Christmas holidays with his father in Jamaica. He graduated from Brother Andrea High School in Markham, where he played on the football team. He attended Seneca College where he received a diploma in Business Administration and later attended Georgia State University where he completed a 4-year degree in Productions.

[14] Cst. Senior’s first summer job was with the Toronto Police Service, where he was a translator. After university, he was employed with Global Television. He completed training and joined the York Regional Police in 2005. Cst. Senior’s maternal grandfather had been a police officer in Jamaica and some family were pleased when he followed in his grandfather’s footsteps.

[15] Cst. Senior met his wife, Shahinah Shukoori, 13 years ago and they have been married for 9 years. They have one daughter together, Olivia, who is 6 years old, having been born in June 2015.

[16] Cst. Senior does not smoke or use drugs and did not have a drink of alcohol until he was in his mid-twenties. He was introduced to the gym in his last year of high school, and presently goes to the gym with his mother 2-3 times per week.

[17] By all accounts, Richard Senior grew up in a loving family that was hard-working and of good character.

Support of Friends and Family

[18] A number of character letters were filed from friends and family of Richard Senior. Only some of the letters expressed an understanding of the seriousness of the offences, however, others minimized the behaviour, one referring to his conduct as a “mishap”. Many expressed shock in learning of Cst. Senior’s behaviour, however, some admittedly do not know the details of the charges and did not seem aware of the evidence heard at the trial, including the many hours of wiretap conversations. Consistently and notably, all of the letters expressed love and caring for Cst. Senior and a willingness to support him. Those letters can be summarized as follows:

a. Marguerite Senior – mother

…Richard is a great dad, from the beginning he has done every task that needs to be done. Bathes, feeds, cooks, teaches her how to conduct herself as a little lady, great manners and most of all always gives hugs and kisses. Richard took her to school the first day of daycare and has made time ever since to take her and pick her up daily with few exceptions…..Their conversation in the morning when she went to daycare was always about Mr. Sun and how he was feeling that day. In the evening, how was school and what would she like for supper. Now she is in grade one and the conversation is about how she is feeling about her new school and what the focus should be that day. Oli would say, daddy uppy down (lift me up) And when he does, she would put her two tiny hands tightly around his neck, squeeze him tightly like her life depends on it and close her eyes with the brightest smile filled with love…

Richard is a 6’4” 240 lbs gentle giant, with a heart of gold, he greets his aunties with a big hug and lifts them off the ground. He has a deep love for family. He has been broken and humbled by this experience and has learned to renew his faith in God and talk to him everyday, asking for forgiveness, mercy and a chance to make it right…

b. Shahinah Shukoori – wife

…Richard has never been the type of person to do anything that would cause his family any significant disappointment. As his wife, I can say that he has always led a very positive lifestyle and has always been there for family and friends in time of need and support. He treats everyone around him with equal courtesy, respect and regard.

As a father, Richard is the best. Nurturing comes very naturally to Richard, as he cares and respects all life. He’s of good moral character, honest and extremely considerate when it comes to our daughter. Richard has been a great channel of support for our daughter since the beginning of the pandemic. Virtual schooling was not an easy task, but Richard showed dedication and commitment when working with her during and after virtual school. Our daughter adores the grounds her father walks on. He is the hero of her world. As a mother, I witness how much she admires her father and the affection that they both shows towards each other.

Although it seems hard to believe or understand, Richard is a good person and has always had morality in his actions. Having met Richard 13 years ago, I can assure you that even though he has had his ups and downs in life, I and of his family/friends are convinced that Richard is a human being with a great heart and a decent person. I can say for sure that Richard has people around him who believe in him to better develop his self-esteem and self-confidence and be able to return to be that amazing person that I/we know.

In these tough times, I want to express to this court that Richard has and will continue to have my unconditional support. He is not defined by his poor judgment, rather he is known by his kindness and compassion. He is loved unconditionally by his family and friends.

Richard has shown serious lack of judgment in both his personal and professional life. I believe Richard has every intention of improving. Through therapy, I do believe that he has taking the necessary steps to work on himself and to be a better person, father, son and an upstanding member of the community. This path of self-improvement will only be possible if this justice system and us give him a new opportunity. The decision of this court will have an impact on the life of his family, friends and especially the life of his 6 year old daughter…

c. Keith Senior – father

…He is a loving father and while we are separated by thousands of miles, he does not fail to reach out to me each day by calling or sending me a text / WhatsApp message, “I love you Dad. Wishing for you an amazing day.”

Over the years I have witnessed my son mature into a loving father and husband. I have never had the occasion to question his probity nor integrity…

d. Christine Senior - step-mother

…He subsequently developed a relationship with my entire family and my children who consider him a big brother. He is extremely kind, caring, considerate and someone they truly love and admire.

Over the years we have watched him grow into a man of integrity, a great son, father and husband.

I spent a month with Richard in 2015 when Olivia, his daughter, was born so that I could assist Shahinah, his wife. He was always very helpful, loving, kind-hearted, patient and the perfect father and husband, I was so very proud to call him “Son”…

e. Ronald Struys – partner of his mother / one of his sureties for 2018 and most of 2019

…Richard always struck me as someone who was proud to be serving the public as a member of the York Regional Police.

The only thing that exceeded his pride in his career was the birth of his daughter, Olivia, in June 2015. He dotes over her to the point that I sometimes complain that he should refrain from being a ‘helicopter’ parent - let her fall, perhaps make some mistakes and learn resilience by recovering. His love and caring is, without doubt, a major contributing factor in the measure of Olivia’s maturity at the young age of six.

The experience of the past 3 years has been stressful for Richard and his family. The level of support from his mother and father and other immediate family members has been amazing. They have demonstrated the support that one could hope would exist in such ordeal…

f. David and Mary Edwards – uncle and aunt / David Edwards was also a surety for a period of time

…We got to know Richard better when he came to live with us in October 2018 when David was one of his sureties and Richard was required to live outside of the GTA.

There was very little time to plan for this change in living arrangements for either us or Richard and despite the stress in his life at the time he was always caring about us and did not want to be a burden to us or impose restrictions to our usual lifestyle and routines. He immediately sat down with us to discuss how we might best ensure the requirements of his bail could be met to the fullest. We discussed the morning routine to enable him to get from Hamilton to Newmarket to meet his designated sign in time at YRP despite having to travel over an hour in unpredictable winter weather and traffic. He ensured that he was always early and had time to deal with unexpected conditions that may have delayed his travel time.

He took all of the conditions of his bail very seriously and deliberately and methodically observed the requirements on a consistent basis. We are not aware of any breach along the way.

… He was always eager to assist us as needed around the house and respected our privacy. During visits from his wife and daughter on weekends we saw him lovingly spend time with his daughter and make sincere attempts to re-establish and nurture the relationship with his wife during this extended time of being apart and dealing with his current situation.

Richard was always open to feedback and advice and seriously considered how it could be applied to his current situation, future goals and plans.

We do not fully know the details of the charges against Richard but feel that if rehabilitation is part of the sentencing outcome, that he will embrace it fully. He is a responsible adult and has the potential to continue to be a productive member of society once this situation in his life is settled and behind him. We will continue to support him in any way that we can. Encouraging him to use the gifts, skills and ability he has to resume or re-establish a productive career.

g. Michael Edwards – uncle

…I have always found him to be a very helpful and attentive person. He always makes himself available whenever I need him. He is trustworthy and has always gotten along well with the people around him. He is also an independent person who I believe is productive, and deeply cares about his family.

h. Allan Senior – uncle

…He is loving, caring, and treats people and his elders with respect. During his teen years he came to Florida a few times, spending time with me, his aunt, and younger cousins. At times, looking after them. He is a very kind person, easy to get along with family and friends. He would encourage me to stay in shape & eat healthy.

His character was impeccable and very strong with integrity, because of his upbringing and teachings by his mother, father, grandparent’s aunts, and uncles. He has never gotten in any trouble prior to this issue and I’m confident that in the future what he learned as a youngster will come back into focus.

i. Lorna Senior – aunt (wife of Allan Senior)

…Over the years, as he got older, he was always a positive role model to my own three children. He would nurture them and guide them with a firm but gentle approach, always allowing them to evaluate each situation and make sound decisions.

There was never a lack of respect or love within the family unit. Richard has always shown utmost concern and care for others.

…Sometimes in life, we stray from the path that we know is right, for whatever reasons, mostly outside influences, but I truly believe with self- reflection, remorse, having the right foundation (which I know Richard has), one can get back on track and become a productive member of society…

j. John Senior – uncle

… he was a very disciplined child, always respectful to his peers and especially adults a trait that speaks volume to his character today.

Richard is a man of integrity, a spiritual person, who grew up with religious values, a love and passion for God and humanity, kind and selfless is one of his virtues…

I know Richard is very remorseful and as expressed that to me, he has grown so much from this experience, he has become a better person, a better man and an amazing father to a little girl my grandniece, who loves her father very much...

k. D. Patricia Russell – aunt

…He is always giving of himself and often tries to be present for family functions, I consider Richard to be my third son.

I watched Richard grow into a smart, responsible and respectful adult as he took on the responsibility of marriage and career. He has been a steady provider for his family and his daughter Olivia is the apple of his eyes. It is a delight to see how caring and gentle he is with her. The bond between father and daughter has grown even closer during the COVID-19 pandemic. He further cemented their father - daughter bond further by patiently assisting her with her online schooling that has been a challenge for many parents and students.

I believe in Richard as a kind, hardworking, strong and faith filled person who I consider a joy to call my nephew.

l. Kris-Anne Pate – step-sibling

…He has always been supportive and willing to support his family if it was in his power to do so.

I think these few years have been very difficult for our family. We have walked with Richard through this process and seen how this has impacted his life and the life of our family. We have cried with him and laughed with him and now we stand with him as this case comes to an end. I know my brother has made mistakes, but I also know he is a caring and trusting person. I hope this letter shows you a little more of who he is and the place he holds in this family. Regardless of the ruling, Richie will always be family; as such, I have a vested interest in his well-being, spiritual life, and family life.

m. Ahmad Shukoori – brother-in-law

…ever since I have known him, he has been a kind person with good intentions. It’s not often that you meet a man you can trust whole-heartedly, but Richard is one of those men. I have always respected Richard because of the way he has treated our family...Never once have I doubted the type of man Richard is. Through every situation we have been in, he has proved himself to be a good man, with his heart always in the right place.

n. Nabila Shukoori – sister-n-law

…I remember the day meeting Richard for the first time, and it was surprising how respectful and kind he was right away. My kids, Ali and Marcella, have gone through tough times in their lives, and he was always there when they needed guidance… He has been an incredible father, uncle, and brother…

o. Austin Shukoor – nephew

…Behind Richard’s big frame is a character that genuinely cares for the people around him, and it’s not a secret that he’s a people-pleaser. When I think of Richard, I think of his huge hugs that really make you feel loved as a nephew. I think of how I would randomly get a message from him on WhatsApp, and it would be a funny video that would just brighten my mood. It wasn’t so much the videos that brighten my mood, but more of the fact that my uncle saw a funny video, and took the time out of his day to send it to his nephew. This simple, yet meaningful act shows the way he cares for those around him, even if they’re a thousand miles away in another country. He’s always looking to please other people, he’s a man that inspires me to be more selfless and do what I can for others.

I deeply admire the way he respects our family’s culture…

Richard’s love for his daughter, Olivia (my cousin), is what I really appreciate about Richard. Olivia, who is now 6, has already grown to be wise beyond her years; she is extremely respectful and smart. This is only possible due to the incredible parenting from both Richard and my aunt, two people who have always shown me nothing but unconditional love. It’s a great feeling to know my baby cousin is in good hands with both a mother and father who will give her everything they can.

I know that Richard is aware of how this situation is affecting those around him…

p. Slaymon Shukoor – nephew / niece

…Richard is a very reliable and honest person. My family can trust him in all matters.

q. Marcella Razaiy – niece

…His charisma, kindness, guidance, patience, and loving nature have helped me grow into the person I am today. I have always been and will always be confident that I can turn to him when I need advice and reassurance on how to make my way through life. Growing up I played all types of sports with hockey being my main focus. My own father was absent from most of my hockey games. However, I remember growing up and going to away games and even my home games that were an hour and a half away from him; I would look out into the crowd and see him standing there cheering me on. He cared, supported, and rooted me through it all. However, it was not only just my sporting events. He came to all school events if he was able to make it and never once did he let me down. From sporting events to Christmas concerts at school, he never once let me down. He showed up when he said he would. He encouraged and motivated me to continuously do better.

… He was also there for me through my teenage years when I was lost and confused about where I was going in life. When I was 18, I left my own home because of personal issues and Richard never hesitated to take me in and help me to find my path again. For a month, he housed me, fed me, supported me, educated me, and most importantly he listened to me when I needed someone to vent to. By him being there through all my years of growth and trying to figure out life, he helped me grow into the person I am today and I will forever be grateful. Now that I am 21 and in my fourth year of university; looking back and reminiscing all these moments, I know I would not have been able to be the strong, independent, confident woman I am today without his unconditional love and support.

Richard is a great father, husband, friend, uncle and every other title that he could be given. He is reliable, strong-hearted, supportive, and caring. He shines light into every room he is in.

r. Jonathan Ali Razaiy – nephew

…Rich, was always the person who would take care of my sister and me. He was the father figure to me when my parents were not around. He never hesitated to pay for our travel if we needed help, buy us our food, and always made sure that we were never left out. He would shower us with gifts when we had no money so we never felt left out. In 2014, I was overcoming addiction and was kicked out of my living area. Rich, took me in and I stayed at his house for the next 6 months before moving back in with my parents. He would pick me up and drop me off at school or anywhere I needed to go. He fed me without asking for anything in return. Rich has always been a very optimistic person believing the best outcome will always come forward. He is a great father who loves putting family first…

s. Kennedy Altenburg – niece

…My dad was in and out of my life for a very long time through my childhood. I didn’t know when I would get to see him, if he was coming to certain events, or if he even wanted to be around. For many girls in that position, it would be heartbreaking and almost traumatizing, sure, part of it was but I had Uncle Rich there instead. He offered at every opportunity he could to come my celebrations and events. He was heartbroken when my college put a limit on the number of attendees each graduate could bring, so he cheered me on from home and celebrated my achievement anyway he could with a family BBQ, text messages, and hugs!

My uncle has lifted me up so high in my life that I want to be able to do the same for him. I want to love, care, and support him and his wife, and daughter anyway I can like they all have for me…

t. Darlene Altenburg – cousin

…He is an enthusiastic, kind, helpful individual.

When I became disabled, he was the first to offer to come to the hospital to provide personal support in my time of need. He provided much fatherly advice to my son Brody and two daughters Kennedy and Ryleigh. He was stern on values and how to treat women and teaching the girls about self-respect.

Richie has always been reliable, and he helped me cope through a most challenging divorce. He was there to console the children, give advice, and share his much-rounded experiences. Richie is educated, tolerant, donates to charities, and accepts the various spiritual beliefs of others. He is all around kind, dependable, and thoughtful towards others. What I particularly admire is his positive personality and his deep love for his wife, and young daughter...

u. Patrick Senior – cousin

…Richard Senior and I come from a family and a long line of hardworking, honest and earnest men & women. We care deeply for the people we love and do good in the communities in which we live & serve.

… I can recall Richard as always being the kind, lovable, warm-hearted person & man that he is today. In my adolescent & teenage years, Richard served as a positive male role-model in my life. He would visit our family in Florida from time to time and would make many efforts to play with my sisters and I, read books, helped us with our homework and specifically played video games with me (as that was a favorite past time of mine). As a young adult (early twenties) himself, Richard also guided me (a teenage boy at the time) on how to navigate the early onset & troubles of manhood, conflicted friendships amongst my peers, dating & women and schooling. I knew that whenever I needed help or support in any form- mentally, emotionally and logically, that I could count & call on Richard to be there for me without hesitation. Simply put, he was the man that I aspired to be and I loved him for all he did and for all that he was present for in my life.

Fast forward to today, Richard is still that loving, caring, dynamic and benevolent man. …He is a provider, caretaker and a contributor to his immediate family and his household; financially, emotionally & mentally stable. …despite any mistakes he may have potentially made, at his core the essence of love, generosity, passion, compassion, empathy and humility reside but within him…

v. Tania Senior – cousin

…Although Richard is my cousin, I look up to him as like an older brother. I can remember my cousin teaching me about humility and grace from my high school days.

Richard has impacted my life, in such a way where I’ve always felt like he was that older protective brother I never had. I’m truly grateful for him because he’s always been there to encourage me, whenever it came to any milestones or great endeavors in my life. I have always felt much pride and honor whenever I’d think of my cousin Richard. I have made a couple mistakes in my own life, and sure enough my cousin Richard was there to remind me that it’s okay to make those mistakes as long as I didn’t make them again, to learn from them, and to continue living my life in a way that would make our family proud, and make most importantly make myself proud. …

… My cousin is one who’d encourage me to always do the right thing, to never give up, and to really think about how our choices can effect those we love. After these offenses have taken place, Richard has shown immense remorse, and has been even closer and connected to family since then.

… Richard has shown true contrition to his offenses, and my cousin has my full support in his rehabilitation…

w. Gari Russell – cousin

…Richard has always been committed to lending a helping hand and doing that which needs to be done without argument. I believe that is what led him down the road to becoming an Officer. His penchant for looking out for others, wanting people not to worry about things and doing what is right are at his core. As such, his impact on others as well as the community is always positive for he only wants what is best for others and his presence well received…

x. Grieg Russell – cousin

…The only thing one could fault Richie for growing up for was his eagerness to please others. If you were a friend of his, you were very lucky. People, to this day, take his kindness for something else. He, unlike most of us, truly values relationships. He would do anything to make himself available for someone he considers to be a friend.

y. Nicole Edwards – cousin

… Richard, or Richie as I call him, has been a role model to me since I was little. Growing up, seeing Richie was always the highlight of any family get together for me. He lights up any room he’s in, and has a quick-witted and contagious sense of humor. Richie is the type of person everyone wants to be around. He’s easygoing and always makes sure the people he loves are safe, fed, and in good spirits.

Richie is one of the bedrocks of our family. Over the years, his example has taught me to be proud of my roots—something that doesn’t always come easily to children of immigrants. Caribana is an important annual event for our family, and since I can remember, Richie has always been there to lead us in celebration of ourselves. I’ve drawn strength from those memories over the past few years especially, which have been so turbulent for the Black community, as I’m sure you know. Richie’s pride has become my pride, and as our parents age, it is family members like Richie who will do the essential work of helping us remember who we are...

z. Roger Goldson – Richard Senior is the nephew of his Godparents

…He is fiercely loyal, dependable, loving, and generous to a fault….He is a person who is always willing to support you through your time of need but reluctant you share with you his difficulties because he doesn’t want to burden you.

….I know he is deeply embarrassed and regrets the emotional toil this trial has been to himself, his family and his colleagues and I know he is determined to make amends.

aa. Maria (Astrid) Heaven – cousin-in-law

…At a moment’s notice, Richard is literally, and his whole family, there in person for me or us. This despite, the complexities of his own life, which pale in comparison to mine. Richard Senior has been there for me, and I am indebted to him. At my chance to help Richard, I instantly said yes, without a doubt, because that’s what I do, because he was and has been there for me too.

bb. Anthony Lindo Jr. – friend

…I viewed Richard as an energetic/vibrant young man that was always positive towards me. He was also very sociable too.

Richard contacted me, prior to the beginning of the school year for 2020-2021, to see if I knew anyone that could assist his daughter with her online schooling that she would have to perform at home. Without hesitation, I introduced Richard’s family to my niece … I managed to work out a schedule along with my work with one of my foster contracts that allowed me to transport my niece to and back home from her tutoring sessions. Richard and his wife not only paid my niece fairly for her service, they also gave me money… each week to compensate me for my gas. … they also extended the hospitality of their home to my foster child and I by making it a routine to eat a meal together when I would arrive with my foster child at their place to pick up my niece. We even did an exchange of gifts, one day, to celebrate the Christmas Holiday. It may not seem like much to others, but it was important to me. It allowed me to maintain and further develop my bond with Richard, his family, my niece, and my foster child …

cc. Daniel Garel – friend

…His charismatic approach to life coupled with his concern for Christian family values and livelihood mirrored the values that my parents also instilled within our household.

Through the years…Richard became very close; almost like a second sibling as we all matured and created a strong bond and respect for our families and each other. He has always contributed the utmost respect and courtesy in putting my concerns and issues ahead of his in the quest and challenges of life in developing myself into a man. One might say he allowed a channel of communication that sometimes sharing with your siblings is a tough and embarrassing task.

….He has always been an inspiration and pathway to aspirations that I wanted to experience in my teenage years and beyond. He always took the time to ensure that not only was I taken care of mentally outside of what I was comfortable sharing with my own immediate family. But also shared hand-me-downs and gifts for things that I was unable to afford or convince my parents that I needed when it came to fashion.

As I grew out of my teenage years and that growing phase of understanding people and evaluating true companionships for the long haul; Richard continued to share experiences and best practices and be a part of my life. …I then also developed myself naturally into a role of mentorship as well when he was in need or needed an ear to communicate with outside of his immediate family….

dd. Chad Garel – friend

…Richard has always been like an older brother to me. Even though he is younger than me in age, Richard has always been there to lend a helping hand, offer support to family and has been the voice of reason in tough times. Richard has definitely helped mold me into the man I am today.

Throughout the years, Richard has consistently demonstrated his strong desire to learn, excel, and think outside of the box, consistently pushing his own boundaries. As a young teenager Richard always had a desire to become a police officer and would conduct himself in a manner that would not jeopardize this opportunity. Richard taught us that it was important to think before we acted, and in doing so helped to keep many of us out of harm’s way…

… Whether it was acting as a community coach in football or being a guest speaker focused on helping students choose a career path or being a guest judge for final presentations in the Sports and Entertainment High School Marketing class, Richard proved not only to be supportive but also demonstrated patience and flexibility in his instruction. Richard gained both the respect and trust of all the students and children he worked with, which is no easy task. Furthermore, it was clear to see that he showed a genuine interest in the community and established a good rapport, maintaining professionalism and positive reinforcements of routines and expectations.

Richard is a great friend, dedicated son and a loving father. I have witnessed first-hand; how much Richard has grown as an outstanding member of his community...

ee. Stephen Brittain – neighbourhood friend

…In approximately 2005 I was visited by a representative from the York Regional Police Services, and was interviewed to talk about the character of Richard, which I was more than happy to do, as he had applied to become a Police Constable with the force. I faithfully gave my knowledge and impressions at that interview, stating that Richard was a great kid (now a young adult), who was friendly, polite, co-operative and someone who did not appear to go through the typical 'teenage angst' that can plague most teenagers.

I have a high regard for the Police, knowing the difficult job that they do, and the unique position that they hold in society. In light of this I was especially disappointed that Richard had violated that trust, that trust that we give to those special people that wear the uniform and the badge, and their vow to uphold the law and protect the citizens in their community.

I'll end with this thought..... Sometimes good people do bad things, but I don't believe that necessarily means they are inherently bad individuals. This is my view of Richard, and in spite of the terrible decisions that took Richard off the rails, I still hold the feelings about Richard that I gave to that Police representative 16 years ago.

ff. Sheldon Gibson – friend

…Richard has always been selfless, maybe too much so. To his own detriment in some cases. The naivety in believing that most are well intentioned. The idea that most of us do not necessarily come from a place of truth can be lost on the best intentioned. A folly in judgement. Not recognizing that not everyone needs a hero. Not recognizing that not everyone is deserving of being treated like family.

Richard has shared with me on more occasions than I would like, his remorse for the pain and extreme anguish he and his family has had to endure over the past two years. I cannot even to begin to fathom the countless questions which go through his mind unanswered as a son, as a husband and most importantly as a father. Answers that to my understanding only time will tell….

gg. Lee-Anne Bruce – step-sister

…Throughout the years, Richie has been a loyal, protective and loving brother, and living in different countries did nothing to undermine that relationship...

… Richie has suffered most of all, not just because his freedom, reputation and career have been shattered, but because he comes from a family structure which is so principled and character-driven that he feels he’s let everyone down. He hasn’t. We feel just as strongly for him as we did before the details of the case were revealed, but he’s let himself down. That battle is the harder one to move past…

hh. Maydene Dunn – mother’s friend

…The relationship Richard and I have is a very loving one and akin to an aunt and her favourite nephew. Whenever he comes to Jamaica, he always visits me and I fondly look forward to his big hugs and lifting me into the air. Richard is very affectionate and a caring, loving person…

ii. Scott Dunn – friend (Maydene Dunn’s son)

…Despite growing up in separate countries – Richard in Canada and me in Jamaica, we’ve been close our entire lives connecting on childhood trips to either country. I think as an only-child, Richard was always excited to have visitors. He was more than happy to share his room, his bed and his toys. He was always warm and always fun to be around….You always feel safe and secure around Richard.

Richard Senior is someone that everyone loves. A person that has friends and close relationships everywhere he has lived and worked and all of us look forward to spending lots more time and growing old with him.

jj. Patrick Grant – family friend

…He has been someone I have looked up to for many years, from childhood, whether it was comics and toys to adulthood with advice how to approach things as a father…

… His generosity, kindness and giving has been the same as I can recall since I was a child.

kk. Michael Joubran – friend

…Richard has and will always be a great friend to me and my family, he has been there for me through good and bad, he was there for me when I was at my lowest, and there for me when I was at my highest. Richard never judged or took sides; he just listened and gave advice when needed, he was always there to make people laugh and was always the life of a party, he always made sure everyone was enjoying themselves before him.

Over the years I have seen Richard become a loving husband, and a loving father and always been a loving brother to me.

ll. Caroline Joubran – friend

…He has made every person feel special in any way he possibly could. He brings laughter and beauty to everything around him. Growing up, he always made us feel special, supported and protected.

Richard always inspired me to work hard, be kind and keep pushing. He is an excellent father figure to his daughter Olivia and supportive husband to his wife.

mm. Ilia Joubran – friend

…It has been 14 years since I have known Richard Senior, as a close friend. I was first introduced to Richard through my spouse and he presented himself to be a very kind and respectful individual. He has always been open hearted and dependable. His friendly and cheerful nature and positive attitude have earned him a special place in our hearts. …He has always appreciated family time. Richard strives to mentor, help and support anyone close to him, especially during difficult times…

nn. Christine Bynoe – family friend

…From the age of 15, I’ve known Richard to be well mannered, respectful, warm, friendly, and kind...

oo. Laura Edwards – cousin

…As long as I have known Richard, I have experienced an individual who is unabashedly kind, hard-working, and carries himself in a polite and respectable manner. Richard has made a large impact on my life in teaching me the importance of family values and being compassionate towards others…

pp. Sheldon Lawrence – friend

…The character of Mr. Richard Senior is one that should never be questioned. He is the kindest most sincere individual that I know, he is a big brother to my wife and I and he is an uncle/ father figure to my daughter and my son.

The love and kind heartedness that he shows to anyone that comes into contact with him is unmatched especially the love that he displays for his wife and precious daughter.

I can go on and on and describe what a loving, kind, caring, respectful, honorable, peaceful, protective, selfless individual Richard is but if I do that I will be writing for days…

qq. Stacey Nash – friend

…The first time we ever met was 17 years ago, when we were both employed at Bell Canada. As his direct manager, I got to see the man he truly was... In my experiences with Richard, I can confidently say that he is one of the most hardworking, focused, and kind people that you can find. He was always very well liked around the office, and never received any negative complaints about him. After he left Bell to pursue his career as a police officer, we became close friends, and I was one of his references to the police academy. Richard and I have remained as very close friends to this day, and I don't see our friendship ever going away…

rr. Anna Esmatyar – wife’s best friend

… He has always been a kind, honest, and trustworthy friend. He's a wonderful father, and a great fun uncle. Our kids absolutely love him. He has always gotten along with my family, my parents and siblings think of him as a great friend as well. I always feel that if anything negative were to happen to us, without a doubt we would turn to Richard for help. We are certain he would always stand by our side. We feel confident knowing that Richard is our friend and well wisher…

ss. Ourania (Nia) Pantopicos – friend

…He is a caring, genuine, considerate, efficient, trustworthy, and dedicated to the well being of others.

Richard Senior has always been there for me and my family. He is like a brother to me, always willing to lend a hand, cooking and offering to bring food and help guide us all in the right direction…

Richard Senior is responsible, focussed, well-respected as a human being and a lovable father. He’s a family man and a big part of his daughter’s life. I’ve watched how their relationship has formed, a healthy bond that fathers and daughters should have. He provides so much love, support and guidance of a good father…

tt. Mr and Mrs Buckeridge – friend

…Richard Senior whom is a good soul with a big heart and someone who is always making sure everyone else is happy, well fed and strives to please others.

If we didn’t have Richard in our lives honestly, our children would not have the experience of knowing unconditional Love from an Uncle figure, he’s the only one there for them all the time. He never forgets a Birthday, sports game, church event and will always be there at the drop of a dime when you need him, he is reliable, Trustworthy and you can talk to him about anything.

Honest, personable, thoughtful, respectful and without judgement…

uu. Milton Buckeridge – friend

…Richard has always been a very kind and caring individual that you can always depend on. He is loved by everyone I know that’s come in contact with him.

In all the years I have known Richard to be a consistent individual, in times of need Richard has always stepped up to help in anyway.

Am trying very simply to say he is a good man and a valuable member of society…

vv. David Steele – friend

…The Richard I know, and love is a family man, a man of high moral standing and more over someone that holds himself and those around him to a high standard. All these charges that are now hanging over him are so out of character that I find it hard to put into words. I can confirm that Richard has always been a reliable, trustworthy and decent person…

[19] Letters such as these are extremely hard to write. This court recognizes the challenge of having to put into a few words the value of another human being and the positive impact that person has had on your life. There is no question that Cst. Senior has the love and support of his family and friends. This is quite obviously a strong knit family who remain closely connected despite physical distance. It is the view of this court, however, that this support system must understand the seriousness of these matters in order to truly provide support to Richard Senior. This was not a mishap. Cst. Senior is not a “law-abiding citizen”. It is troubling that one of the sureties, admittedly, did not know the details of the charges. One letter stated: “we were relieved to hear that it actually was not real in the end”. One person referred to the accusations as “inaccurate and false”. The fact is that Cst. Senior committed a number of serious offences over a period of time. One of these offences carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Cst. Senior’s family and friends need to understand and accept the true serious nature of what Cst. Senior chose to involve himself in for them to assist him moving forward.

[20] The letters describe a different Richard Senior than the one involved in this criminal activity. The letters portray Richard Senior as a man of integrity, one who always puts others first, and who deeply respects his family. However, the Richard Senior presented to this court was someone quite different. It is clear that there is much more to Richard Senior than the behaviour that formed these crimes. However, it is also clear that there is a darker side to Richard Senior, not known to his family and friends.

Psychological / Psychiatric Reports

[21] Richard Senior commenced psychotherapy with Denise D’Alessandro in July 2019 and continues to attend for such therapy bi-weekly. A letter dated December 1, 2021 was provided from the psychotherapist which stated in part as follows:

…Mr. Senior has completed thirty-eight one-hour sessions of counselling. He can be described as co-operative, insightful, and deeply anguished by his own behaviour and the ensuing multitude of criminal charges related to his activities as a York Region Police Officer…

….Mr. Senior deeply regrets his involvement in illegal activities. He recognizes that, in the course of his career, he made serious errors of judgement and placed the welfare of his work and his personal relationships at serious risk…..He has occupied time with trying to repair the damage inflicted upon his marriage and is very involved in parenting his six year old daughter Olivia….Mr. Senior struggles with enormous guilt and shame and these feelings are monumentally affecting his daily life. He worries about his daughter, Olivia, and how she will be able to cope with the possible incarceration of her father. He struggles with the consciousness of how he has so terribly shamed and humiliated his wife…and his parents on a daily basis.

In terms of my professional opinion, Mr. Senior presented as compliant, cooperative, and fully resolved to not repeat his mistakes of the past. He understands that he will need to rebuild his life moving forward and deeply values the commitment and loyalty of his wife and his parents. He remains an excellent candidate for continued therapy, and I believe that, if he pursues this course, he will continue to develop the tools to rebuild his life….

[22] The fact that Richard Senior has been attending for ongoing psychotherapy reflects positively on hopes for rehabilitation.

Analysis

General Principles

[23] In sentencing an offender, the court must take into account the circumstances of the offence and the offender, together with codified principles of sentencing.

[24] The fundamental purpose of sentencing, described in section 718 of the Criminal Code, is to contribute along with crime prevention initiatives, to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing just sanctions.

[25] The objectives for sentencing judges to consider are set out in section 718(a) to (f) of the Criminal Code and are as follows:

a. to denounce unlawful conduct and the harm done to victims or to the community that is caused by unlawful conduct;

b. to deter the offender and other persons from committing offences;

c. to separate offenders from society, where necessary;

d. to assist in rehabilitating offenders;

e. to provide reparations for harm done to victims or to the community; and

f. to promote a sense of responsibility in offenders, and acknowledgement of the harm done to victims or to the community.

[26] Pursuant to section 718.1, a sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. Proportionality is a cardinal principle of sentencing, therefore, whatever weight a judge gives to the objectives listed above, the ultimate sentence imposed must respect the fundamental principle of proportionality. See R. v. Nasogaluak, 2010 SCC 6, paras. 41-43; R. v. Safarzadeh-Markhali, 2016 SCC 14; R. v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64, [2015] 3 S.C.R. 1089; R. v. Omoragbon, 2020 ONCA 336, para. 28

[27] In R. v. Parranto, 2021 SCC 46, the Supreme Court of Canada recently stated:

[9] This Court has repeatedly expressed that sentencing is “one of the most delicate stages of the criminal justice process in Canada” (R. v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC 64, [2015] 3 S.C.R. 1089, at para. 1). More of an art than a science, sentencing requires judges to consider and balance a multiplicity of factors. While the sentencing process is governed by the clearly defined objectives and principles in Part XXIII of the Criminal Code, it remains a discretionary exercise for sentencing courts in balancing all relevant factors to meet the basic objectives of sentencing (Lacasse, at para. 1).

[10] The goal in every case is a fair, fit and principled sanction. Proportionality is the organizing principle in reaching this goal. Unlike other principles of sentencing set out in the Criminal Code, proportionality stands alone following the heading “Fundamental principle” (s. 718.1). Accordingly, “[a]ll sentencing starts with the principle that sentences must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender” (R. v. Friesen, 2020 SCC 9, at para. 30). The principles of parity and individualization, while important, are secondary principles.

[12] As to the relationship of individualization to proportionality and parity, this Court in Lacasse aptly observed:

Proportionality is determined both on an individual basis, that is, in relation to the accused him or herself and to the offence committed by the accused, and by comparison with sentences imposed for similar offences committed in similar circumstances. [para. 53]

Individualization is central to the proportionality assessment. Whereas the gravity of a particular offence may be relatively constant, each offence is “committed in unique circumstances by an offender with a unique profile” (para. 58). This is why proportionality sometimes demands a sentence that has never been imposed in the past for a similar offence. The question is always whether the sentence reflects the gravity of the offence, the offender’s degree of responsibility and the unique circumstances of each case (para. 58).

[28] While previous sentencing decisions are helpful to consider, each sentencing a court is tasked with must be conducted by considering the specific offence and specific offender in that particular case. Only in this manner will proportionality be respected. Every case is unique in some way.

[29] Section 718.2 of the Criminal Code directs the court to consider various relevant aggravating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender, such as:

a. Offences motivated by bias, prejudice or hate;

b. Abuse of offender’s spouse or family member;

c. Abuse of a person under the age of 18 years of age;

d. Abuse of a position of trust or authority;

e. Evidence that the offence had a significant impact on the victim;

f. Benefit to criminal organization;

g. Terrorism offence;

h. Commission of offence while offender was subject to a conditional sentence order or released on parole

This court has also considered s. 10 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

[30] Further, this court must consider the principles of parity, totality, and to not deprive the person of liberty if less restrictive sanctions are appropriate and consistent with the harm done to the victim and the community. (s. 718.2(b)-(e))

Sentencing Principles in Relation to Police Officers

[31] There are a number of cases dealing with the sentencing of police officers. From those cases, principles have emerged.

[32] In R. v. Cook, 2010 ONSC 5016, [2010] O.J. No. 4414 (S.C.J.), following a trial, Justice Hill was sentencing a 43-year old police constable for attempting to possess a Schedule I substance for the purpose of trafficking, possession of marijuana, theft of several MP3 players, and breach of trust. This officer had stolen from a crime scene fifteen packages of what he believed to be cocaine and concealed them in his garage. Unbeknownst to the officer, the packages contained flour and a tracking device. During the execution of a warrant at his residence, the stolen packages were found along with numerous MP3 players and nearly half a kilogram of marijuana. Mr. Cook had received and presented a number of letters of appreciation / recognition and commendations. He had no police discipline history or prior criminal record. The Court imposed a global sentence of five years and eight months’ incarceration. In relation to sentencing police officers, specifically, the court stated as follows:

[29] Police officers, as officials discharging public duties, occupy a special position of trust in the community: R. v. LeBlanc (2003), 2003 NBCA 75, 180 C.C.C. (3d) 265 (N.B.C.A.) at para. 32; R. v. McClure (1957), 1957 CanLII 485 (MB CA), 118 C.C.C. 192 (Man. C.A.) at 200; United States v. Rehal, 940 F.2d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 1991). "[A] heavy trust and responsibility is placed in the hands of those holding public office or employ": R. v. Berntson (2000), 2000 SKCA 47, 145 C.C.C. (3d) 1 (Sask. C.A.) at para. 24 (aff'd 2001 SCC 9, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 365, at para. 2). Individuals working in the justice system "owe a duty to the public to uphold the values of that system" (R. v. Feeney et al. (2008), 2008 ONCA 756, 238 C.C.C. (3d) 49 (Ont. C.A.) at para. 5) with the administration of justice "depend[ant] on the fidelity and honesty of the police": R. v. McClure, supra, at 200.

[30] Undoubtedly, policing is a challenging line of work…

[31] "[T]he vast majority of police officers perform their duties carefully and reasonably": Hill v. Hamilton Wentworth Regional Police Services Board, 2007 SCC 41 at para. 36 per McLachlin CJ.

That said, as in any line of work, the moral compass of an individual police officer may become untrue as he or she elects "to cross to the other side of the road and become a criminal": R. v. Yaghi, [2002] NSWCCA at para. 39.

[32] The police, in the execution of their duties, gain access to places and situations which the ordinary person does not experience: United States v. Foreman, 926 F.2d 792, 795 (9th Cir. 1990). In such situations, an officer may be in a position "where he can commit offences without arousing suspicions": R. v. Shaw (1968), 1968 CanLII 1011 (BC CA), 66 W.W.R. 626 (B.C.C.A.) at 628. For example, where a police officer victimizes a drug dealer, "the offender is likely to escape scot-free": R. v. Yaghi, supra, at para. 17. In R. v. LeBlanc, supra, at para. 27, the court stated:

Police officers have opportunities, practically on a daily basis, to cross the line and engage in prohibited conduct. The public trusts them to resist the temptation and relies upon the courts to deal firmly with those who stray…

[35] Because police compliance with the rule of law is presumptive, when sentencing a police officer for a crime involving breach of the public trust the court may properly take into account that the accused would necessarily be well aware "of the consequences of its perpetration": R. v. Cusack (1978), 1978 CanLII 2283 (NS CA), 26 N.S.R. (2d) 379 (C.A.) at 385 (cited with approval in R. v. Feeney et al., supra, at para. 8); R. v. Yaghi, supra, at para. 48 (as a police officer, "the potential consequences" of the accused's criminality "should have been starkly obvious to him").

[36] Not surprising is the reality that individuals who find themselves before a criminal court convicted of a breach of trust crime are able to adduce abundant good character evidence - "[i]t is,

of course, this very type of character profile which allows an individual to attain a position of trust": R. v. Williams, 2007 CanLII 13949 (ON SC), [2007] O.J. No. 1604 (S.C.J.) (QL) at para. 25; R. v. Ranson, [2007] EWCA Crim 153 at p. 2 (as to police defendants, "[a]s would be expected, each appellant was of good character"); R. v. Ryan, [2004] N.S.J. No. 338 (S.C.) (QL) at para. 30 (aff'd 2004 NSCA 115) (in the face of the number of character references filed with the court sentencing a police officer, trial judge remarked that it was difficult to "get any real understanding of why he engaged" in the criminal activity). Indeed, it has been observed that "law-abiding persons, with good employment records and families...are the ones most likely to be deterred by the threat of severe penalties": R. v. Proulx (2000), 2000 SCC 5, 140 C.C.C. (3d) 449 (S.C.C.) at 503.

[37] In any case involving conviction and sentence, the accused is stigmatized, more or less, by the process. While shame and disgrace may be amplified in the instance of a public official, these consequences are not to be over-emphasized in determining a fit punishment: R. v. Robillard (1985), 18 C.C.C. (3d) 266 (Que. C.A.) at 273; R. v. Gyles, [2003] O.J. No. 6249 (S.C.J.) (QL) at para. 27 (aff'd [2005] O.J. No. 5513 (C.A.) (QL)).

[38] Quite apart from the police corruption offence in s. 122 of the Criminal Code, breach of a position of trust is a deemed aggravating factor in sentencing: s. 718.2(a)(iii) of the Code. General deterrence and denunciation drive the sentencing process in abuse of trust prosecutions. In the absence of an exceptional mitigating factor (e.g., addiction, see R. v. Lensen, [1994] O.J. No. 359 (C.A.) (QL)), severe sentences are justified for police officer offenders to honour these sentencing principles. Regard may be had to these judicial statements:

In my opinion the paramount consideration in this case is the protection of the public from offences of this sort being committed by persons who are given special authority by our law to deal with individual members of society, and to deter such persons from acting in breach of their trust. (R. v. Cusack, supra, at para. 13) (approved, R. v. Feeney et al., supra, at para. 8)

If one unbundles the several principles that come into play in shaping a fit sentence for conduct by an on-duty police officer amounting to criminal breach of trust under s. 122, general deterrence and denunciation overshadow all others. Those principles command more than lip service; they must impact upon the sentencing process and help shape its outcome.

While some question the usefulness of lengthy custodial sentences as a deterrent for hardened criminals, no one has voiced any thoughtful objection to the view that such sentences likely have a beneficial behaviour-shaping impact on law enforcement personnel, who have more than a passing acquaintance with penal law and a keen insight into the unpleasant reality of prison life. (R. v. LeBlanc, supra, at para. 25-6)

The integrity of the police forces in Canada must be maintained to its highest level and when there is any departure by criminal conduct of an officer the message must be clear that such will not be tolerated. (R. v. Ryan (S.C.), supra, at para. 47)

[40] Over and above the stain upon the administration of justice arising from criminality by a police officer breaching the trust imposed upon him or her, such conduct inevitably, but unfairly, results in diminishment of the reputation of his or her police force and fellow police officers: see R. v. Moyse (1988), 38 A Crim R 169 (SASC) at 176 (crimes brought "shame on ... the Force in which you were a highly trusted and respected member") and the observations of Murray CJ. in Shortt v. The Commissioner of an Garda Síochána & others, supra, at pp. 2-4…

[41] A few words deserve to be said regarding two features of the sentencing of a police officer which impact on the severity of punishment - the consequential impacts of loss of employment, and, incarceration in protective custody.

[42] In R. v. Feeney et al., supra, at para. 8, the court approved the statement in R. v. Cusack, supra, at para. 13, that in the case of conviction for serious breach of trust in the course of duty, the "act will result not only in dismissal from the position of trust but also in the imposition of substantial punishment". While a police officer who breaches the public trust brings upon him or herself the consequence of dismissal, that penalty falls to be considered within the totality of the circumstances worthy of review by a sentencing court: R. v. Hunt, [1978] B.C.J. No. 92 (C.A.) (QL) at paras. 3, 11; R. v. Ranson, supra, at p. 3; R. v. Keyte, supra, at p. 2. That said, the jeopardy of loss of employment on the part of a police officer cannot "trump the pressing need for denunciation and deterrence": R. v. Preston, 2008 ONCA 530at para. 3.

[43] Because an inmate who is known to be, or discoverable as, a former police officer is at risk from general population prisoners, such an offender will almost inevitably serve much or all of the sentence in protective custody. This reality, involving as it does more limited social contact and institutional amenities, ordinarily warrants consideration in mitigation of punishment: R. v. Strawhorn, [2008] VSCA 101 at para. 219 ("the increased difficulties that he would be likely to experience whilst in custody ... by reason of ... his status as a protected person"); R. v. Ranson, supra, at p. 3 ("The judge recognised ... that prison would be more difficult for them than others"). In this regard, and without adopting any formula for this jurisdiction, the observations of Giles J.A. in R. v. Patison (2004), 143 A Crim R 118 (NSWCA) at 136-7, also recognize this sentencing factor…

Justice Hill attached an appendix to his decision setting out various sentencing decisions in relation to police officers.

[33] In R. v. Rudge, 2014 ONSC 24, following a trial, Justice Hambly was sentencing a police constable for breach of trust. He had turned over intelligence memoranda regarding motorcycle gang membership and activities to members of the Hells Angels. The offender was 51 years old with a prior conviction for a domestic assault. He was suspended with pay following his arrest and started another business. Evidence was presented that the leaking of these confidential documents had caused irreparable damage to the ability of the police service to investigate crime generally and, in particular, the Hells Angels. There was a noticeable drop-off in information coming to the police service from confidential informers. Justice Hambly relied extensively on the principles from Cook. Mr. Rudge was sentenced to four years imprisonment. The court stated:

[55] The stability of society rests on the integrity of police officers. It is the function of police to investigate persons suspected of criminal offences, gather evidence against them and provide that evidence to the crown for the purpose of prosecuting them. The Criminal Code places great power in the hands of the police to gather evidence and to arrest suspected offenders. The intelligence departments of police forces provide their members with confidential information to use in the performance of their functions. When a police officer uses that power to assist others in the commission of criminal offences he violates the trust society places in him. He also breaches the trust which his fellow officers placed in each other. Police officers will not trust each other unless they are confident that their fellow officers are dedicated to the high standards of the profession as they are.

Justice Hambly also referred to a number of sentencing decisions in relation to police officers. See also: R. v. Burnett, 2019 NSSC 212; R. v. Ryan, 2004 NSSC 173; R. v. Ruthowsky, [2018] O.J. NO. 3247 (S.C.J.); R. v. Hodson, 2011 BCPC 243

[34] General principles to be considered by the court in sentencing police officers were also discussed in R. v. Schertzer, 2015 ONCA 259. Several Toronto Police Service officers were convicted after trial of attempt to obstruct justice and perjury. The officers searched an apartment before the warrant physically arrived at the premises. The attempt to obstruct justice count related to all of the officers practicing deception, including by falsifying their notes and by testifying falsely, in order to conceal that the search had been done without a warrant. The perjury counts related to the fact that some of the officers gave false evidence at the preliminary inquiry of the apartment’s occupant. The Court stated as follows:

[132] Public confidence in the honesty of the police is fundamental to the integrity of the criminal justice system. As Moldaver J.A. wrote in Schaeffer v. Wood, 2013 SCC 71 at para. 52, citing Sir Robert Peel:

"'the police are the public and...the public are the police... The wisdom of this statement lies in its recognition that public trust in the police is, and always must be, of paramount concern."

[133] Police officers are sworn to uphold the law. In R. v. Feeney, 2008 ONCA 756, 238 C.C.C. (3d) 49, at para. 8, this court endorsed the following passage from R. v. Cusack (1978), 1978 CanLII 2283 (NS CA), 41 C.C.C. (2d) 289 (N.S. S.C.(A.D.)):

[T]he paramount consideration in this case is the protection of the public from offences of this sort being committed by persons who are given special authority by our law to deal with individual members of society, and to deter such persons from acting in breach of their trust...

The commission of offences by police officers has been considered on numerous occasions by the Courts, and the unanimous finding has been that their sentence should be more severe than that of an ordinary person who commits the same crime, because of the position of public trust which they held at the time of the offence and their knowledge of the consequences of its perpetration..

[136] When the perpetrators of the crime are police officers sworn to uphold the law, the objective of denunciation has heightened significance. Police officers owe a special duty to be faithful to the justice system.

[35] While the cases referred to above are factually distinct from the case at bar, these general principles to be considered when sentencing police officers are applicable.

Consecutive versus Concurrent – Drugs and Firearms

[36] Given that this court is tasked with sentencing Cst. Senior in relation to numerous offences, including drug and firearm offences, a critical consideration is whether those sentences should be served consecutively or concurrently. A number of cases involving drugs and firearms were provided to the court which can be summarized as follows:

• R. v. Clarke, [1994] N.S.J. No. 474 (C.A.) – The offender was sentenced for possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and possession of a prohibited weapon. He was in constructive possession of one kilogram of cocaine which was in his motel room and in possession of a powerful semi-automatic handgun when apprehended in a taxi cab. The offender was sentenced to four and a half years for each offence to be served consecutively for a total of nine years. The court held that it was appropriate to impose consecutive sentences given the fact that the two offences were designed to protect different legal interests of the public.

• R. v. Dass, [2008] O.J. No. 1161 (S.C) – This was a sentencing hearing for an accused convicted of possession of a restricted firearm, careless storage of ammunition, possession of a prohibited device, possession of a controlled substance, and possession of a controlled substance for the purpose of trafficking. The Court recognized the aggravating impact of the combination of narcotics and firearms offences. The Crown argued for six to six and a half years. The defence argued for two years. The Court held that concurrent sentences were appropriate where there was a “reasonably close nexus between the offences in time and place, and where they appear to be part of ‘one continuing crime operation’”. The Court stated at para 115:

[115] …It seems to me obvious that, if one is to treat the combination of firearms and weapons offences as an aggravating factor, then there must be a sufficiently close connection between the two types of offences that, absent some unusual circumstance, the sentences for the offences ought to be concurrent.

The accused was sentenced to three years.

• R. v. Delchev, 2014 ONCA 448 – As a result of the execution of a warrant, police located numerous weapons, some drugs and related paraphernalia in the accused’s residence. He was convicted of sixteen weapon and drug offences. The sentence imposed was 42 months imprisonment. The court made it clear that the decision as to whether a sentence should be made consecutive or concurrent is a discretionary one and that there was no absolute rule that drugs and weapons convictions must attract consecutive sentences in all cases.

• R. v. Crevier, 2015 ONCA 619 – A search warrant on the accused’s apartment led to the discovery of drugs and a gun. The accused was sentenced to a global sentence of six years; four years for one of the firearm offences and two years consecutive on the possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. The imposition of a consecutive sentence for the cocaine conviction was deemed warranted because it constituted a different legally-protected interest from the firearm offence.

[37] It is the view of this court that, in the present case, the drug offence (trafficking by offer) and firearm offences (possession of firearm obtained by crime / weapons dangerous) must attract consecutive sentences. While it is true that these offences were all related to the planning of a robbery of a drug warehouse, the offences themselves are very distinct in time and place. Cst. Senior’s offers to traffic cocaine to George Papoutsos and Henry Wong were completely distinct from him removing the firearm from the YRP vehicle and placing it in the rental van. The purpose of obtaining the firearm was to aid in carrying out the robbery. The offers to traffic did not assist in the robbery in any way, rather, it was a means of disposing of substances found after the fact for profit. These offences constitute different legally-protected interests of the public.

Range of sentence

[38] In the present case, Richard Senior is to be sentenced for committing a number of different crimes. Not surprisingly, there are no identical precedents to guide this court’s consideration of parity. However, various cases were provided and considered to assist this court in the unique circumstances of this case:

• R. v. Ryan, 2004 NSSC 173 – The accused pleaded guilty to trafficking marijuana through a source and breach of trust. He was a 33-year-old RCMP officer, with 8 years of experience, outstanding performance reviews, a first-time offender, in a stable relationship with young children, and community support. He expressed remorse. The defence requested a conditional or suspended sentence with probation. The sentence imposed was a total of 4 years concurrent on each count.

• R. v. Cook, 2010 ONSC 5016, [2010] O.J. No. 4414 (S.C.J.) - Following a trial, it was determined that a Peel Regional Police officer stole what he believed to be 15 kg of cocaine during an investigation (part of an unrelated RCMP controlled delivery), 21 MP3 players, and possessed nearly half a kilogram of cannabis. Mr. Cook was found guilty of attempted possession for the purpose of trafficking (cocaine), breach of trust (x 2), theft of electronic devices, and possession of marijuana. The accused was 43 years old, with no prior record or discipline history. The defence argued for two years incarceration. The Crown argued for 12 years incarceration. The sentence imposed was 5 years and 8 months.

• R. v. Hodson, 2011 BCPC 243 - The offender was a police officer with the Vancouver Police Department. During his employment, he trafficked 48 ounces of marijuana to a former informant who he knew would be able to sell for him. He also accessed the police database system (PRIME) to obtain information to aid him in avoiding arrest. He entered a guilty plea for the drug offence and for two counts of breach of trust. The Crown sought a total sentence of four years. The defence sought a conditional sentence. The offender was 33 years of age, with a caring and supportive family, married with four young children. The sentence imposed was a total of three years, less three weeks for pre-trial custody, broken down as follows: 2 years for trafficking, with another 2 years for the first breach of trust applied concurrently, and 1 year consecutive for the second breach of trust in relation to accessing the database.

• R. v. Rudge, 2014 ONSC 24 – Following trial, a Niagara Regional Police officer was found guilty of breach of trust for providing intelligence information to the Hells Angels (4 documents – confidential police intelligence bulletins). He was 51 years old, had a prior conviction for domestic assault, was suspended with pay following his arrest, and started another business. The Crown sought a four-year sentence and defence sought a conditional sentence. The sentence imposed was 4 years.

• R. v. Kramp, [2014] O.J. No. 6592 (C.J.) – A police officer pleaded guilty to conducting dozens of unauthorized queries on an internal police database and providing the information obtained to friends. She also pleaded guilty to careless storage of a firearm. While there were risks, the offender’s actions did not compromise any ongoing investigations or prosecutions. She had a serious dependence on alcohol. She had been on a stringent bail. She received a suspended sentence with probation for three years.

• R. v. McCarthy, 2016 NLCA 49 – A clerical employee at the police department pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice. She saw her cousin’s picture displayed on a wall in the drug section. She warned her cousin that he was being investigated by police. She received a conditional sentence of nine months.

• R. v. Ruthowsky, [2018] O.J. No. 3247 (S.C.J.) – The offender, a senior detective constable, was found guilty after trial of accepting bribes, obstruction of justice, breach of trust, and trafficking cocaine. The Crown requested 10 years. The defence requested 3-4 years. The accused was a 44-year-old offender, married with two children. He received a global sentence of 13 years less 6 months pre-trial custody broken down as follows: 10 years for bribery, 4 years for breach of trust concurrent, 8 years for obstruction of justice concurrent, and a consecutive sentence of 3 years for trafficking.

• R. v. Maranan, [2018] O.J. No. 4228 (C.J.) – This was a breach of trust by a civilian member of the Toronto Police Service. She conducted numerous database inquiries that provided her with confidential information. She conducted these inquiries at the request of other persons and the information was then disclosed. There was no evidence that disclosure of the information had compromised any particular investigation or prosecution or resulted in any harm to any particular person, however the known risk existed. The offender’s actions were not impulsive or a momentary lapse of judgment. The conduct was repeated frequently over an extended period of time. She received financial benefit. The Crown asked for two years incarceration. The defence argued for a conditional sentence in the same range. She was sentenced to one-year incarceration.

• R. v. Burnett, 2019 NSSC 212 – Justice Chipman found the accused guilty of all seven counts for which he was charged, including breach of trust, theft over $5000, trafficking in a Schedule I substance, laundering proceeds of crime, obstruction of peace officer, and fabrication of evidence. Mr. Burnett had served for approximately 20 years with the RCMP. While in the position of Sergeant and Commanding Officer, he stole 10 kilograms of cocaine from an exhibit locker and provided the cocaine to a friend who passed it on to traffic with the proceeds to be divided. The Crown argued for a sentence of 10-12 years incarceration. The defence argued for 4-7 years. The accused was a 51-year-old, first time offender with a supportive family. He received 4 years for breach of trust, 2 years concurrent for theft over, 6 years for trafficking, 1 year concurrent for laundering, 4 years for breach of trust, 1 year concurrent for obstruction, and 1 year concurrent for fabrication. The sentence was then reduced to 10 years for totality.

• R. v. McNish, 2021 ABCA 28 – The offender, a police officer on medical leave, along with other current and former officers, were hired by a businessman to harass his ex-partner and to monitor her activities in aid of a custody dispute. He conducted surveillance and searched police databases for information on the victim and others, in part to facilitate his surveillance and in part to provide the resulting information to others. His involvement spanned 2.5 years. He was suspended as a result of these offences. The offender was 61 years old with no prior record. The Crown sought a sentence of 18 months incarceration. The defence sought a conditional sentence of the same length. The sentence imposed was six months imprisonment.

It should also be noted that each of these cases referred to a number of other cases which have also been considered.

[39] As for possession of a weapon obtained by crime and weapons dangerous, it was difficult to obtain any guidance from the case law as this case is so factually unique. Having said that, this court did review the following cases: R. v. Thompson, 2021 SKPC 13; R. v. Kamara, 2020 SKCA 76; R. v. Horsley, 2013 ONCJ 310; R. v. Muise, 2008 NSSC 340.

[40] As for trafficking in steroids, no cases were provided by counsel to suggest an appropriate range of sentence. This court did review a few cases on its own, specifically:

• R. v. Canary, 2015 ONSC 5929 – This first-time offender invited a finding of guilt on the basis of an agreed statement of facts. The offender had been observed by police transferring plastic tubs between his vehicle and another vehicle. Inside the tubs were 220,000 pills determined to be steroids. He was also found in possession of $14,000. The sentence imposed was an 18-month conditional sentence.

• R. v. MacLean, 2015 NSSC 146 – Ms. McLean was employed as a nurse at the Central Nova Scotia Correctional Facility in Dartmouth for about 10 years. She pleaded guilty to one count of providing steroids to an inmate and breach of trust. She lost her job and her career in nursing as a result of her behaviour. The sentence imposed was an 18-month conditional sentence.

• R. v. Bouchard, 2014 ABCA 424 – The offender was a former member of the Canadian Armed Forces, but at the time was working as a civilian nurse for the Armed Forces. She sold steroids to uniformed members on several occasions. She pleaded guilty to trafficking in steroids and attempting to export steroids. The sentence imposed was two $1500 fines.

[41] Further, as for trafficking cocaine by offer, specifically, no cases were provided to suggest an appropriate range of sentence.

[42] Trafficking by offer is not an inchoate offence, but rather a substantive offence. Trafficking by offer is captured under the same section of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act as is trafficking – s. 5(1) – as s. 2(1) of the Act defines several methods of trafficking, including trafficking by offer. Therefore, a person who never actually has or provides any substance may be found guilty. In R. v. Murdock, 2003 CanLII 4306 (ON CA), [2003] O.J. No. 2470 (C.A.), the Court made it clear that the offence of trafficking by offer is complete if an offer is made regardless of whether the person making the offer actually intended to sell or give the product. The maker of the offer must only intend that the offer be taken as a true and genuine offer. In Murdock, the accused did not have the drugs that he offered to sell to an undercover officer. The Court stated:

[40] Offers to traffic in narcotics even when there is no intention to traffic, induce recipients of the offers to participate in drug trafficking and thereby promote and expand the illicit drug trade. It is also entirely reasonable to conclude that those who are prepared to make serious offers to traffic in narcotics will, if the opportunity presents itself, complete the transaction. Furthermore, offers to traffic in narcotics, even if there is no intention to actually carry through with the offer, raise the same risks of collateral criminal activity that "true" offers to traffic precipitate. Finally, the criminalization of trafficking by offer can reasonably be viewed as aimed at the very harm occasioned by the actual trafficking in narcotics. By criminalizing conduct which in many occasions will be preparatory to actual trafficking in narcotics, Parliament may reduce the incidence of actual trafficking and the harm caused by it.

[43] The costs to society of drug abuse and trafficking in illicit drugs, especially cocaine, have been recognized time and time again. There are direct costs, such as health care and law enforcement, and indirect costs, such as loss of productivity. See: Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1998 CanLII 778 (SCC), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 982, at 1039-1040; R. v. Smith (1987), 1987 CanLII 64 (SCC), 34 C.C.C. (3d) 97 (S.C.C.), at pp. 123-4; R v. Hoang and Pham, [2002] O.J. No. 1355 (S.C.), at para. 71.

[44] The Crown provided a number of cases to support a range of sentence for trafficking one pound (half kilogram) of cocaine between five and eight years incarceration. See: R. v. Brown, 2021 ONCA 35 at para 9; R. v. Maone, 2020 ONCA 461; R. v. McIntyre, 2016 ONCA 843; R. v. Bryan, 2011 ONCA 273 at para 1; R. v. Momprevil, 2012 ONCA 209; R. v. Nero, 2008 ONCA 622

[45] The most analogous case to the case at bar provided by the Crown was R. v. Cook. In that case, the accused believed that he was in possession of 15 kg of cocaine, however, the packages actually contained flour as a result of a controlled delivery. He was convicted of attempted possession for the purpose of trafficking cocaine for which he was sentenced to four years imprisonment. In Cook, Justice Hill referred to the case of R. v. Chan (2003), 2003 CanLII 52165 (ON CA), 178 C.C.C. (3d) 269 (Ont. C.A.), in which the Court of Appeal stated as follows:

[74] It is clear that, but for the intervention of the authorities, the appellant would have succeeded in his efforts to obtain possession of a much larger quantity of heroin than that which he actually received. Because the appellant's efforts were frustrated only as the result of that intervention, I see no reason for reducing his sentence in any significant way from that which would have been imposed had the appellant succeeded. For the same reason, even if I am wrong in my conclusion that it was open to the trial judge to convict the appellant for the full offence and the appellant should have been convicted only for an attempt, I do not view that as a basis for reducing the sentence that was imposed.

[46] In R. v. Russo, 1998 CanLII 886 (ON CA), [1998] O.J. No. 4143 (C.A.), the two accused agreed to supply four kilograms of cocaine to a drug trafficker. They were convicted of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. They each received two years’ incarceration from the Court of Appeal, overturning the trial judge’s decision to impose conditional sentences. The Court found that the trial judge erred in discounting the gravity of the offence due to the inability to deliver the drugs and also erred in giving no weight to the magnitude of the crime due to the massive amounts of drug contemplated for delivery. The Court stated:

[14] The exact nature of the criminal conspiracy entered into by the respondents should have been a important consideration in the imposition of sentence. These respondents were prepared to supply a massive amount of cocaine to a person they believed to be a drug trafficker. Their agreement contemplated a large-scale commercial transaction in a deadly substance. While ultimately no profit was made, there can be no doubt that profit was the motive. These respondents were prepared to do significant damage to others so that they could make money.

[15] Conspiracies that contemplate the sale of large amounts of a drug like cocaine clearly pose a much more significant danger to the community than do agreements to supply small amounts to others for purely personal use. The amount the respondents agreed to sell to Destefano indicates that they were ready and willing to participate in the drug trade at a very high level. The trial judge erred in principle in giving no weight to the magnitude of the crime contemplated by the agreement made by the respondents.

The Court found that a penitentiary range sentence was essential to give effect to the relevant purposes and principles of sentencing and that a sentence of three years was necessary. However, given that the offenders had already served 10 months of their conditional sentences, the sentences were varied to two years.

[47] In addition to the cases provided by counsel and those set out above, this court has also considered some further conspiracy to traffic cases:

• R. v. Brodricks, 2021 ONSC 6457 – After trial, the accused was convicted of one count of trafficking in cocaine and one count of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. Mr. Brodricks was involved in a program to purchase cocaine at the kilogram level using pooled funds and then sell it. The offender was 33 years old and had an unrelated and dated criminal record. The sentence imposed was 3 years for conspiracy to traffic cocaine and 2.5 years concurrent for trafficking in cocaine.

• R. v. Maric, 2019 ONSC 3099 – The accused pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. Mr. Maric had four kilograms in a unit associated to him and helped broker a deal for approximately 50 kilograms, of which he was to receive 10.5 kilograms. He was 34 years old, with a dated and unrelated record. The Court stated:

[76] It is clear that denunciation and deterrence must be the paramount sentencing considerations for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine. Cocaine causes immense social harm. As noted by the Court of Appeal in Hamilton, at para. 104, the “use and sale of cocaine kills and harms both directly and indirectly. The direct adverse health effects on those who use the drug are enormous and disastrous.” As Code J. noted, in R. v. Duncan et al., 2016 ONSC 1319, at para. 37, “…trial courts bear witness every day to the widespread ravages and criminal consequences of cocaine addiction and cocaine trafficking.”

[77] Given the destructive impact of cocaine, courts must clearly denounce those who would seek to profit off the sale of this substance with exemplary sentences. Further, the courts must send a clear message to those who would traffic in cocaine that they will face significant jail sentences if they do. Given the time Mr. Maric has spent on bail without incident, in my view specific deterrence is not as pressing an objective in this case. That said, given the significant monetary profits related to cocaine trafficking, a message must still be sent to Mr. Maric so that he understands that any such profits are not worth the severe consequences he will face if caught.

[80] A review of the cases provided shows that in multi-kilo conspiracy to traffic offences, two of the most significant factors affecting the quantum of sentence are 1) the quantity of drugs involved and 2) the role that the offender played, for example, was he or she a directing mind or merely a courier. This is related to the fundamental principle of proportionality: the more drugs that are involved, the higher the gravity of the offence; the more significant role played by the offender, the higher the degree of moral blameworthiness.

The Court determined the fit and proper sentence to be nine years, which was then reduced to seven years and eight months as a result of pre-sentence custody and restrictive bail conditions.

• R. v. Ethier, 2018 ONSC 1200 – The two accused were found guilty after trial of conspiring to traffic in cocaine and trafficking in cocaine. In addition, one of the accused was found guilty of possession of marijuana, producing marijuana and possession of proceeds of crime in the sum of $10,000. Evidence at trial disclosed a well-organized cocaine supply operation on a commercial level involving multiple transactions, supplying cocaine on an ongoing basis to a network of distributors. There was evidence of several specific cocaine deals at the ½ kilogram level. Ethier was 51 years old, with no prior drug related convictions. Jones was 48 years old with no prior drug related convictions. The court referred to R. v. McGregor (below) and recognized that a five-year sentence was abnormally low for conspiracy to traffic cocaine for mid-level dealers trafficking in quantities that include the kilogram level. Nevertheless, on the conspiracy to traffic and trafficking charges, the offenders were sentenced to five years concurrent less appropriate credits.

• R. v. McGregor, 2017 ONCA 399 – The offender was a long-time distributor of cocaine for a criminal organization, admitting on wiretaps that he had been trafficking in cocaine as a distributor for an organized crime group for over ten years. Following a guilty plea, the offender was sentenced to seven years and 69 days broken down as: five years for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, five years concurrent for trafficking in cocaine, two years and 69 days consecutive for committing an offence for the benefit of a criminal organization, one year concurrent for possession of oxycodone, and one year on each of the seven counts of breach of recognizance to be served concurrently. The Court of Appeal stated:

[11] Finally, the Crown says that the sentence for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine and trafficking in cocaine was unfit as it was outside the proper range for the quantity of cocaine and level of involvement of the appellant

[12] At sentencing, the Crown asked for a sentence at the top end of the range which it submitted was 8-14 years. The appellant asked for 5 years, which he stated was the low end of the range, which he argued was 5-13 years.…The sentencing judge then imposed the five year sentence, as part of the total sentence of seven years, 69 days. This court was apprised of two other sentences imposed on two offenders charged in the same police investigation, one by the same judge, of eight years each based on joint submissions in R. v. Perron, (11 October 2016), Ottawa, 13/30422 (S.C.) and R. v. Gheorghevici. Although this was not a joint submission, the trial judge referred to the sentence imposed in Gheorghevici and it is apparent he considered the parity principle when imposing this sentence.

[13] We agree with the Crown that the case law supports the submission that eight years is toward the low-end of the accepted range for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine for mid-level dealers trafficking in quantities that include the kilogram level. While a very heavy sentence was warranted in this case, we cannot say that it is an error of law beyond the discretion of the trial judge to have imposed five years as part of a total sentence following a guilty plea and this is in accord with other sentences to which the parity principle applies.

The sentence was upheld.

• R. v. Majnoon, 2009 ONCA 876 – The offender pleaded guilty to conspiracy to traffic cocaine. He received a sentence of three years less one day with 12 months of credit for time served. The Crown appealed. This involved a cocaine distribution network in which large quantities of cocaine were brought to Ottawa from Montreal and Toronto. This offender and three others were distributors at the kilogram level. The Court of Appeal found that a more appropriate sentence would have been five years, minus 12 months of credit. The sentence was varied to four years.

[48] In the case at bar, there was, in fact, no warehouse and there was no cocaine. However, this does not diminish the seriousness of what Cst. Senior was prepared to do. This court accepts that Cst. Senior was planning to rob this drug warehouse. This court accepts that Cst. Senior was intending to sell any cocaine that he discovered at the kilogram level at a cost of approximately $30,000 or more. The difficulty in this case, however, is that the amount of cocaine that Cst. Senior was expecting to find was never clear. In fact, while there was certainly discussion of trafficking at the kilogram level, Cst. Senior was never certain that cocaine would be found at all. A significant consideration in sentencing for drug offences, whether it be actual trafficking, conspiracy to traffic, or possession for the purpose of trafficking, is the quantity of the drug. In such a case as this, with such uncertainty about the potential quantities, the appropriate range of sentence is not so clear.

[49] Further, even where ranges have been pronounced, the Supreme Court of Canada recently held as follows in Parranto:

[4] …Sentencing ranges and starting points are simply different tools that assist sentencing judges in reaching a proportionate sentence.

[16] Quantitative appellate guidance generally takes one of two forms: starting points, or sentencing ranges. These tools are best understood as “navigational buoys” that operate to ensure sentences reflect the sentencing principles prescribed in the Criminal Code. Busy sentencing judges face a challenging task; the Code often provides for a wide range of possible sentences and the factual circumstances of each case vary infinitely. Sentencing must begin somewhere, and both starting-point and range methodologies assist sentencing judges by providing a place to start in the form of either a single number or a range. As this Court has recognized, however, “there is no such thing as a uniform sentence for a particular crime” (M. (C.A.), at para. 92). Neither tool relieves the sentencing judge from conducting an individualized analysis taking into account all relevant factors and sentencing principles.

[36] The key principles are as follows:

1. Starting points and ranges are not and cannot be binding in theory or in practice (Friesen, at para. 36);

2. Ranges and starting points are “guidelines, not hard and fast rules”, and a “departure from or failure to refer to a range of sentence or starting point” cannot be treated as an error in principle (Friesen, at para. 37);

3. Sentencing judges have discretion to “individualize sentencing both in method and outcome”, and “[d]ifferent methods may even be required to account properly for relevant systemic and background factors” (Friesen, at para. 38, citing Ipeelee, at para. 59); and,

4. Appellate courts cannot “intervene simply because the sentence is different from the sentence that would have been reached had the range of sentence or starting point been applied” (Friesen, at para. 37). The focus should be on whether the sentence was fit and whether the judge properly applied the principles of sentencing, not whether the judge chose the right starting point or category (Friesen, at para. 162).

… Sentencing judges retain discretion to individualize their approach to sentencing “[f]or this offence, committed by this offender, harming this victim, in this community” (R. v. Gladue, 1999 CanLII 679 (SCC), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688, at para. 80 (emphasis in original)). There is no longer space to interpret starting points (or ranges) as binding in any sense.

The Court referred to starting points and ranges as “tools and not straightjackets”. (para. 36)

Consideration of Collateral Consequences

[50] In R. v. Suter, 2018 SCC 34, [2018] S.C.J. No. 34, the Supreme Court of Canada considered how collateral consequences, consequences that arise from the commission of the offence, the conviction, or the sentence imposed should factor into sentencing. The Court stated as follows:

[46] As I have observed, sentencing is a highly individualized process: see Lacasse, at para. 54; R. v. Proulx, 2000 SCC 5, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 61, at para. 82; Nasogaluak, at para. 43. In R. v. Ipeelee, 2012 SCC 13, [2012] 1 S.C.R. 433, this Court stated that a sentencing judge must have "sufficient manoeuvrability to tailor sentences to the circumstances of the particular offence and the particular offender" (para. 38). Tailoring sentences to the circumstances of the offence and the offender may require the sentencing judge to look at collateral consequences. Examining collateral consequences enables a sentencing judge to craft a proportionate sentence in a given case by taking into account all the relevant circumstances related to the offence and the offender.

[47] There is no rigid formula for taking collateral consequences into account. They may flow from the length of sentence, or from the conviction itself: see R. v. Pham, 2013 SCC 15, [2013] 1 S.C.R. 739, at para. 11; R. v. Bunn (1997), 1997 CanLII 22728 (MB CA), 118 Man. R. (2d) 300 (C.A.), at para. 23; R. v. Bunn, 2000 SCC 9, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 183 ("Bunn (SCC)"), at para. 23; Tran v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2017 SCC 50, [2017] 2 S.C.R. 289. In his text The Law of Sentencing (2001), Professor Allan Manson notes that they may also flow from the very act of committing the offence:

As a result of the commission of an offence, the offender may suffer physical, emotional, social, or financial consequences. While not punishment in the true sense of pains or burdens imposed by the state after a finding of guilt, they are often considered in mitigation. [Emphasis added; p. 136.]

I agree with Professor Manson's observation, much as it constitutes an incremental extension of this Court's characterization of collateral consequences in Pham. In my view, a collateral consequence includes any consequence arising from the commission of an offence, the conviction for an offence, or the sentence imposed for an offence, that impacts the offender.

[48] Though collateral consequences are not necessarily "aggravating" or "mitigating" factors under s. 718.2(a) of the Criminal Code -- as they do not relate to the gravity of the offence or the level of responsibility of the offender -- they nevertheless speak to the "personal circumstances of the offender" (Pham, at para. 11). The relevance of collateral consequences stems, in part, from the application of the sentencing principles of individualization and parity: ibid.; s. 718.2(b) of the Criminal Code. The question is not whether collateral consequences diminish the offender's moral blameworthiness or render the offence itself less serious, but whether the effect of those consequences means that a particular sentence would have a more significant impact on the offender because of his or her circumstances. Like offenders should be treated alike, and collateral consequences may mean that an offender is no longer "like" the others, rendering a given sentence unfit.

[49] Collateral consequences do not need to be foreseeable, nor must they flow naturally from the conviction, sentence, or commission of the offence. In fact, "[w]here the consequence is so directly linked to the nature of an offence as to be almost inevitable, its role as a mitigating factor is greatly diminished" (Manson, at p. 137). Nevertheless, in order to be considered at sentencing, collateral consequences must relate to the offence and the circumstances of the offender.

Application of the Principles to this Case

[51] There is no question that denunciation and deterrence are key considerations in this sentencing.

[52] There are a number of aggravating factors which must be considered:

a. Richard Senior abused a position of trust and authority in relation to the public he was to serve and protect.

b. He abused a position of trust and authority in a number of different ways over a prolonged period of time.

c. In relation to counts 4 and 5, accessing and disclosing the confidential information to Henry Wong, Cst. Senior believed that he was providing this information to a mid level Asian organized crime figure to conduct a “rip” and who was likely moving up in the ranks. If this were true, Cst. Senior’s actions would have had a great potential for danger and risk public safety. Cst. Senior provided this information believing it was true.

d. In relation to accessing and disclosing the information to Henry Wong, Cst. Senior took time to consider his approach to completing this task. There was planning and deliberation.

e. With respect to trafficking by offer, while there was in fact no cocaine to be trafficked, Cst. Senior believed that cocaine could be present and demonstrated a clear intention and willingness to traffic whatever amount of cocaine he found. Cocaine is a drug known to be addictive and dangerous to individuals and to the community.

f. With respect to trafficking by offer, the discussions were in relation to quantities at the kilogram level with a value in the range of $30,000 per kilogram.

g. Even though no profit was made, profit was clearly the motive. Cst. Senior was prepared to release large amounts of this dangerous drug into the community so that he could make large amounts of money. The motivation is greed.

h. With respect to trafficking by offer, Cst. Senior offered the product to Henry Wong, who he knew to be a person associated with organized crime.

i. Cst. Senior offered to traffic the cocaine to two different people.

j. There was significant planning and deliberation that went into the offences of theft of the firearm, weapons dangerous and trafficking cocaine. While ultimately the theft of the firearm from the YRP vehicle was opportunistic, there was a great deal of thought and planning as to how to get this weapon from a YRP locker.

k. Cst. Senior obtained the firearm with the intention of using it to assist at the fictional drug warehouse. He took a tool of law enforcement, meant to be used to protect the public, for a purpose directly opposed to its intended use.

l. The firearm was loaded and accompanied by additional ammunition and other tactical equipment.

m. In relation to Counts 13 and 14, accessing and disclosing confidential police information at the request of friends and acquaintances, Cst. Senior’s actions impacted upon the privacy of others on more than one occasion.

n. Cst. Senior’s actions risked diminishment of both the repute of the administration of justice and the reputation of the YRP and its officers.

[53] This court considered whether the combination of drugs and firearms should be considered to be an aggravating factor in this case as it has been recognized in other cases. On the facts of this case, this court does not find this to be an aggravating factor. While the offences do involve the combination of drugs and firearms, it is the view of this court that there is not a sufficiently close connection between the two types of offences in this case to warrant its consideration as an aggravating factor. As stated above, this court views these offences as distinct acts on the facts presented, therefore calling for consecutive sentences.

[54] There are also a number of mitigating factors which must be considered:

a. Cst. Senior has no prior criminal record, thereby making him a first-time offender.

b. As for remorse or insight, Richard Senior provided a letter to the court to express his views and feelings. It stated in part as follows:

It has been 3 years of hard reflection and lamentation for me. It has been a hard lesson about accountability and hubris….

Somewhere along the line my values became compromised and the lines of right and wrong became blurred…..I gave into flawed and errored judgement.

I was angry and hurt by personal hardship within my life, that at the time, I believed all encompassing and I felt as though I was drowning. I needed a life preserver as an escape from my problems rather than dealing with them, and as a result the sliding scale of my morale code began to slide in the wrong direction. I was emersed in personal strife and chose to focus on work and anything outside of personal conflicts because “I believed” I was always right. I love my wife and I love my family but I was unwilling to make the changes within myself to be a better version of me, because I believed I was the best version of me and if that was not appreciated, I would turn my attentions elsewhere in search of validation of my ego….I put myself, my family, my friends, my work and the public I swore to protect in danger all because of my ego.

I hurt so many people within my sphere, and beyond, that it ways upon my conscience immensely. I carry the guilt and shame of all those I have let down and hurt, with me daily. All of the faces I look upon, a constant reminder of the tragedy of my actions. I am no stranger to being wrong, I am no stranger of having faults. I can not unsee the damage I have done. I can not undo the hurt that I have caused.

These words fail to capture the totality of what haunts me and how apologetic I feel, but I am truly sorry.

It is unclear to this court what Cst. Senior takes responsibility for and the reasons for his conduct. As he was entitled to do, Cst. Senior pleaded not guilty and had a trial. On some aspects, some serious aspects, he was successful. He cannot and will not be faulted for pleading not guilty, having a trial, and bringing an entrapment application. However, it is difficult for this court to grasp whether Cst. Senior is remorseful for his criminal conduct or for something else, and whether he has any insight into his behaviour. This is certainly not an aggravating factor, but as to whether it is mitigating, it is the view of this court that mitigation is lessened where it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine for what the person is remorseful. While rehabilitation is an important factor to consider, it is difficult to gauge his likely success in this regard without a full understanding of his position.

c. The fact that Richard Senior has been attending for ongoing psychotherapy reflects positively on hopes for rehabilitation.

d. Cst. Senior, through his admissions, narrowed the focus of this trial considerably.

e. By all accounts, Cst. Senior comes before this court as a person of prior good character.

f. Cst. Senior has tremendous support from friends and family. However, many seem to suggest that Cst. Senior is not to blame. Many authors suggested that he had no criminal intent or that he was somehow led into doing what he did. This case is not an example of a simple error in judgment. His conduct was a series of conscious and deliberate decisions to break the law, not once but repeatedly. His actions amount to much more than simply not following proper procedure. His actions were not motivated by a desire to make for a safer community. To the contrary, the conduct appears to have been motivated by power and greed. The letters do not acknowledge this aspect of Cst. Senior’s character in any way. The support of friends and family is recognized by this court as mitigating, however, it is important that the support network understand the wrongfulness of Cst. Senior’s actions so that they may assist him in the future.

g. Cst. Senior has been on a strict bail since his arrest. He was arrested on October 9, 2018 and released on bail on October 16, 2018. He has been on some form of house arrest bail since that time, with various exceptions being allowed. For example, on October 25, 2018, Cst. Senior entered into a recognizance that required him to reside with his surety in Hamilton and to be subject to house arrest with exceptions for medical emergency, meeting with counsel, or while in the direct presence of one of his three sureties. He was also subject to GPS monitoring for a number of months. On February 15, 2019, the bail was varied to add his spouse as a surety, and to allow him to return to his home, still on the same form of house arrest and GPS monitoring. It is the view of this court that the conditions have been, in some respects, toward the more stringent end of the scale. By all accounts, Richard Senior has been diligent in following the terms of his release. Time spent on stringent pre-sentence bail conditions, especially house arrest, is a relevant mitigating consideration. Having said that, however, this court knows little about how he spent his time while on this bail and whether the conditions did, in fact, interfere with his life, such as with his ability to see his family or move around, thereby tempering the mitigation.

[55] It is not clear to this court what has or will happen to Richard Senior’s career as a police officer. While loss of employment, and the resulting shame or disgrace, can be considered on sentencing, this information was not provided, and, therefore, cannot be factored into this analysis.

[56] It is likely that Cst. Senior will spend his incarceration in protective custody given his career as a police officer. This may lead to limited social contact and institutional amenities. This is a collateral consequence to be considered on this sentencing. It is also of note that Cst. Senior will be incarcerated in the midst of this COVID-19 pandemic.

Conclusion

[57] This court does not have any real understanding of why Cst. Senior engaged in this type of criminal activity to which he has been found guilty. His written representation is vague. What is clear is that Cst. Senior used his position as a police officer, and the resources provided to him to do that job, in a manner diametrically opposed to his sworn duties. Criminal conduct by one police officer negatively impacts upon the integrity of all police forces and all police officers. Such conduct must not and will not be tolerated.

[58] The friends and family of Richard Senior reminded this court that its decision would have an impact on the life of his family, friends and especially the life of his 6-year-old daughter. This court accepts that to be true. However, this court is only called to make this difficult decision because of choices Richard Senior made. Therefore, it is Richard Senior’s decisions that will have an impact on the life of his family, friends and his 6-year-old daughter. As a police officer, Richard Senior would have known the potential consequences of his actions and decisions better than most. This court is required to respond to those decisions made by Richard Senior.

[59] For all of the foregoing reasons, having carefully considered the entirety of the circumstances, this court has concluded that an appropriate global sentence would be 7.5 years of imprisonment (2735 days), apportioned as follows:

a. Count 4, unauthorized use of computer: 1 year (365 days)

b. Count 5, breach of trust: 1 year (365 days), concurrent with count 4

c. Count 6, possession of firearm obtained by crime: 2 years (730 days), consecutive

d. Count 7: weapons dangerous: 2 years (730 days), concurrent with count 6

e. Count 9: traffic cocaine: 4 years (1460 days), consecutive

f. Count 12: traffic steroids: 90 days consecutive

g. Count 13: unauthorized use of computer: 90 days consecutive

h. Count 14: breach of trust: 90 days, concurrent to count 13

[60] As a credit toward this sentence, Richard Senior served 8 days in pre-trial custody, which when credited at a ratio of 1.5 to 1, amounts to 12 days. These 12 days will be noted as a credit on the warrant of committal.

[61] This court has considered the principle of totality. It is the view of this court that this sentence does not exceed the overall culpability of Cst. Senior. This combined sentence is not unduly long or harsh given the circumstances of this case.

[62] In addition, because Cst. Senior has been convicted of certain drug offences under the CDSA, a weapons prohibition is mandatory under s. 109(c). The Order will be a 10 year prohibition from possessing any firearm, other than a prohibited firearm or restricted firearm, and any crossbow, restricted weapon, ammunition and explosive substance, and a lifetime prohibition from possessing any prohibited firearm, restricted firearm, prohibited weapon, prohibited device and prohibited ammunition.

[63] As for a DNA order, all of the offences, with the exception of trafficking steroids, is a “secondary designated offence” as per s. 487.04. The factors to be considered on making the order are: 1) the criminal record of the offender, 2) the nature of the offence and circumstances surrounding its commission, and 3) the impact on the privacy and security of the person. In R. v. P.R.F. (2001), 2001 CanLII 21168 (ON CA), 161 C.C.C. (3d) 275 (C.A.), para 25, Justice Rosenberg stated that “in the vast majority of cases it would be in the best interests of the administration of justice to make the order…”. Cst. Senior does not have a criminal record. However, the crimes are numerous and serious. This court has not been provided any evidence to establish an undue impact on Cst. Senior’s privacy. There will be a DNA Order in relation to all offences for which Cst. Senior has been convicted, with the exception of trafficking in steroids (count 12).

[64] A disposition order in relation to property seized has already been made on consent.

NOTE: As noted in court, on the record, this written Ruling is to be considered the official version and takes precedence over the oral reasons read into the record. If any discrepancies between the oral and written versions, it is the official written Ruling that is to be relied upon.

Released: January 20, 2022