In our courts
By Steve Bilodeau
Stalker spends time behind bars
The victim employed the offender at his dental office in September 2000. They got into an intimate relationship which ended abruptly in November 2000, when the offender learned that the victim was engaged. Towards the end of November, the offender began calling the victim, up to 50 calls in two days, including profanity and threats. There were instances of minor assault, unwanted attendances at his place of employment, etc. In December 2000, a peace bond was issued to keep her away from him and there was also a restraining order in civil court. The offender persisted with her phone calls and other contact, including sending gifts to the victim's home. In October 2001, she began sending anonymous letters to businesses in the area, falsely claiming that the victim was HIV positive and that he molested his patients. She was re-arrested and, while on bail, engaged the services of an undercover police officer to continue the harassment. She eventually pleaded guilty. The offender was a 28-year-old female, well educated, with a good work history. A psychological report indicated she was remorseless and likely to reoffend. The court considered her to be a continuing danger to the victim and sentenced her to 18 months in jail in addition to the three weeks she had already served. She was also placed on probation for three years with strict "no contact" conditions.
Reagan CHARCHUK,
from the Provincial Court,
July 22, 2002
Child porn producers put in prison
The Crown appealed an 18-month conditional sentence imposed after a guilty plea to making child pornography. The Court of Appeal agreed that the sentence was unfit. Those who make child pornography for a commercial purpose are generally looking at a jail sentence in a federal penitentiary (that is, longer than two years). In this case, the offender was cooperative with the authorities so he was sentenced to 18 months in jail. The court noted how dangerous the Internet has become in this area: "The menace that distribution of child pornography through the Internet poses cannot be underestimated. The Internet provides an unregulated, instant world-wide distribution network that is immediately accessible for viewing, downloading, and even wider distribution."
W.E.H., from the Court of Appeal, June 27, 2002
Where the offender actually knew that his models were under 18 when he took the pictures, it was more serious. This offender was in that situation, showed no remorse and did not cooperate with the authorities. He was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in jail.
John James HEWLETT, from the Court of Appeal, July 30, 2002
Burned arsonist cools heels in jail
The offender threw two Molotov cocktails at a synagogue, setting it on fire. Damage was minimal and he had burned himself when committing the act. He was motivated by anger at Jewish actions in the Middle East. He pled guilty to arson and was sentenced to 12 months jail and three years probation. Both sides appealed. The Court of Appeal agreed with the Crown that the sentence was too low. The motivation of revenge made the offender very blameworthy. It was also a planned and deliberate crime. The minimal damage was not because of any restraint shown by the offender, and the court looked at the destruction he intended to do, not what actually resulted. His actions were directed against an identifiable racial group, which made this a true "hate crime." The court found the sentence must also be increased because the target of the hatred was a place of worship. The sentencing judge was correct in calling this an act of terrorism, but he didn't adequately address deterrence and denunciation. The Court of Appeal increased the jail sentence to 2 1/2 years.
Yousef SANDOUGA, from the Court of Appeal, August 27, 2002
*For more interesting court cases see Criminal Prosecutions - Criminal Case Summaries.
