William Gordon Beach

The accused was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, and making sexually explicit material available to a child.

The Crown conceded the charge of making sexually explicit material available to a child.

The court assessed the credibility and reliability of the complainant, a child, and the defence witnesses (the accused and his grandparents).

Significant inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony, coupled with evidence suggesting potential coaching by her father and the credible testimony of the grandparents, led the court to conclude that the Crown had not proven the remaining charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused was acquitted on all counts.

The accused was charged with two counts of sexual abuse of a child under 16 years of age: touching the complainant with his hand for a sexual purpose contrary to section 151 of the Criminal Code, and inviting the complainant to touch his penis contrary to section 152 of the Criminal Code.

The complainant testified that the accused, a family friend, engaged in a pattern of escalating sexual touching during vehicle rides over approximately two years when she was between 7 and 8 years old.

The accused denied all allegations.

The court found the complainant credible and accepted her evidence, finding the Crown proved the first count beyond a reasonable doubt.

However, the court found insufficient evidence to prove the second count, as the complainant did not establish that the accused invited her to touch his penis specifically.

The accused was convicted on count one and acquitted on count two.

The offender was sentenced following convictions for possession of child pornography, manufacturing child pornography, and making child pornography available through peer‑to‑peer file sharing software.

The evidence included numerous images and videos involving children, including images of the offender’s step‑daughter taken while she slept, and forensic evidence linking downloads and distribution to the offender’s computer and phone.

The court emphasized that denunciation and general deterrence are the primary sentencing objectives for offences involving the sexual exploitation of children under the Criminal Code.

Aggravating factors included breach of trust toward a step‑child, distribution through file‑sharing software, and the disturbing nature of the images.

The offender received a custodial sentence of two years less a day followed by three years of probation, along with ancillary orders including SOIRA registration, a DNA order, a s.161 prohibition order, and forfeiture of electronic devices.