The court sentenced B.O. for sexual interference and exposing a person under 16 to sexually explicit material, both involving his daughter, M.A. The court reviewed the circumstances of the offences and the offender, the harm to the victim, and the aggravating and mitigating factors.

The court imposed concurrent sentences of 5 years for sexual interference and 2 years for exposing a child to sexually explicit material, with ancillary orders including prohibitions and registration requirements.

The decision applies the Supreme Court’s guidance in R. v. Friesen and emphasizes the gravity of sexual offences against children, the importance of denunciation and deterrence, and the need for proportionality and parity in sentencing.

This is a sentencing decision following the conviction of S.S. for sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, and making sexually explicit material available to a child, involving his biological daughter.

The offences occurred over approximately three years when the victim was between five and eight years old, constituting an extreme breach of trust.

The Crown sought an eight-year global sentence, while the Defence proposed three to four years.

The court imposed a global sentence of seven years, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence due to the severity and duration of the abuse and the profound impact on the victim.

Mitigating factors included the offender's first-time offender status, young age at the time of the offences, and family support, but these were balanced against the lack of remorse.

Ancillary orders, including DNA, weapons prohibition, SOIRA registration, communication bans, and a tailored s. 161 order, were also imposed.

J.N.Z. was found guilty by a jury of invitation to sexual touching and sexual interference against a child (RM) aged 8-12.

The offences involved multiple incidents of sexual touching and one act of oral sex, occurring over several years, with the offender in a position of trust.

The court applied the principles from R. v. Friesen, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence for child sexual offences.

Despite mitigating factors (age, support, no prior record at the time of offences), aggravating factors included the victim's young age, significant victim impact (suicidal ideation), multiple incidents, breach of trust, and a pattern of opportunistic behaviour (overlapping with a previous conviction involving another child).

The court rejected a reformatory sentence, deeming a penitentiary term necessary.