Territorial Court
Decision Information
Decision information:
Abstract: Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence
Decision Content
R. v. F.R., 2012 NWTTC 05 T-1-CR2011001891 IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES IN THE MATTER OF: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - vs. - F. R. _________________________________________________________ Transcript of the Reasons for Sentence by The Honourable Chief Judge R.D. Gorin, at Behchok= in the Northwest Territories, on March 30th A.D., 2012. _________________________________________________________ APPEARANCES: Mr. M. Lecorre: Counsel for the Crown Mr. J. Bran: Counsel for the Accused ---------------------------------------- Charge under s. 271 Criminal Code of Canada Upon direction of the presiding Judge, this transcript has been modified to identify Accused and/or Victim by initials pursuant to Section 486.4 of the Criminal Code Official Court Reporters 1 THE COURT: This particular matter was 2 adjourned over to today's date so that I could 3 deliver my reasons for sentence in the same 4 community from which the offence arose. 5 Are there any further things that counsel 6 would like to say before I pass sentence? 7 MR. LECORRE: Nothing further from the 8 Crown, Your Honour. 9 THE COURT: Mr. Bran? 10 MR. BRAN: Yes, Your Honour, just very 11 briefly. This matter was dealt with back in 12 December. There was a trial in this community 13 and Mr. R. was found guilty. 14 Since that time, I understand that Mr. R. 15 has been continuing to assist his mother on a 16 day-to-day basis as noted in the pre-sentence 17 report. He is the primary caregiver due to 18 her lack of eyesight and I understand that he 19 has continued to do that and has essentially 20 been staying out of trouble and has not been 21 consuming any alcohol since his last period of 22 consumption which is referenced in the 23 pre-sentence report. 24 THE COURT: Thank you, and just to be 25 clear, which community is he now residing in? 26 MR. BRAN: He is residing in 27 Yellowknife where his mother has moved, I Official Court Reporters 1 1 believe that was in August of last year, and 2 Mr. R. moved with her as he is her primary 3 caregiver. 4 THE COURT: That's what I thought, I 5 just wanted to be sure, thank you. 6 MR. BRAN: Thank you. 7 THE COURT: F. R. comes before this 8 Court to be sentenced for a sexual assault 9 that he committed on June 22nd of last year in 10 the community of Behchok=. He was convicted 11 after trial so there is not the mitigating 12 effect of a guilty plea. He is now 26 years 13 of age. He was 25 at the time that he 14 committed the offence. He is of Tli Cho 15 descent. He has no criminal record. 16 The offence in question occurred when the 17 accused entered the room where his victim was 18 sleeping in the bed that she normally slept in 19 when staying at her grandmother's home. He 20 penetrated his victim's vagina digitally while 21 she was sleeping. When she awoke and 22 objected, he left the room that she was in and 23 went into another room in the house where he 24 fell asleep. The victim testified that the 25 accused's pants were partway down at the time 26 that she observed him. He was heavily 27 intoxicated at the time. Official Court Reporters 2 1 The Crown states that the maximum jail 2 term of 18 months would be appropriate, along 3 with a probation order. The Crown is opposed 4 to a conditional sentence. Defence counsel 5 argues for a conditional sentence in the range 6 of eight to ten months. Had the Crown 7 proceeded by way of indictment, Section 742.1 8 of the Criminal Code would prohibit the 9 imposition of a conditional sentence. 10 However, the Crown has proceeded summarily and 11 therefore a conditional sentence is not 12 prohibited by Section 742.1. 13 Sentencing is a highly subjective 14 exercise. I have to take into account many 15 different factors and, where they compete with 16 each other, balance them. Ultimately the 17 question that I have to answer is what is a 18 fit and proper sentence in this case having 19 regard to the circumstances of the offence and 20 the circumstances of the accused. 21 The fundamental purpose of sentencing is 22 set out in Section 718 of the Criminal Code 23 which provides that the fundamental purpose of 24 sentencing is to contribute, along with crime 25 prevention initiatives, to respect of the law 26 and maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe 27 society by imposing just sanctions. These Official Court Reporters 3 1 just sanctions must have one or more of the 2 following objectives: 3 to denounce unlawful conduct; to deter the 4 offender and other persons from committing 5 offences; to separate offenders from society 6 where necessary; to assist in rehabilitating 7 offenders; to provide reparations for harm 8 done to victims or to the community; and to 9 promote the sense of responsibility in 10 offenders and acknowledgement of the harm done 11 to victims and to the community. 12 Section 718.1 of the Criminal Code sets 13 out the fundamental principle of sentencing 14 where it states that a sentence must be 15 proportionate to the gravity of the offence 16 and the degree of responsibility of the 17 offender. As the majority of the Supreme Court 18 of Canada stated in R. v. Ipeelee [2012] 19 S.C.J. No. 13, a case decided one week ago 20 from today: 21 The fundamental principle of 22 sentencing (i.e., proportionality) 23 is intimately tied to the 24 fundamental purpose of sentencing 25 - the maintenance of a just, 26 peaceful and safe society through 27 the imposition of just sanctions. Official Court Reporters 4 1 Whatever weight a Judge may wish 2 to accord to the various 3 objectives and other principles 4 listed in the Code, the resulting 5 sentence must respect the 6 fundamental principle of 7 proportionality. Proportionality 8 is the sine qua non of a just 9 sanction. First, the principle 10 ensures that a sentence reflects 11 the gravity of the offence. This 12 is closely tied to the objective 13 of denunciation. It promotes 14 justice for victims and ensures 15 public confidence in the justice 16 system. 17 So it is through the sanctions which are 18 proportional to the gravity of the offence and 19 the degree of responsibility of the offender 20 that therefore the sentence contributes to 21 respect for the law and maintenance of a just, 22 peaceful and safe society. 23 The facts in this case are indeed serious. 24 The accused in this case sexually assaulted 25 his vulnerable sleeping victim in the bed that 26 she usually occupied at her grandmother's 27 house. He and the victim are cousins and have Official Court Reporters 5 1 the same grandmother. He apparently was 2 staying there at the time of the incident. He 3 assaulted her in a place where she was 4 entitled to feel safe and secure. He 5 digitally penetrated her vagina and it was 6 obvious to me from the victim's reaction, when 7 she recounted the crime in court, that she 8 found and continues to find the assault very 9 troubling. His pants were observed to be 10 partway down and it seems, although I don't 11 think it is certain, that he was preparing to 12 engage in sexual intercourse with the victim. 13 The digital penetration which occurred 14 amounted to a gross violation of the victim's 15 physical integrity. The gravity of the 16 offence committed by the accused is high. 17 As far as his moral blameworthiness is 18 concerned, he may have been heavily 19 intoxicated at the time but that is not a 20 mitigating factor. However, he comes before 21 the Court with no prior convictions related or 22 otherwise. There is not, therefore, the same 23 moral blameworthiness that would be present 24 had he previously been convicted of and 25 sentenced for crimes and then committed the 26 crime before the Courts today: see Arcand, 27 264 C.C.C. (3d) 134; 40 Alta. L.R. (5th) 1999, Official Court Reporters 6 1 [2011] 7 W.W.R. 209, 499 A.R. 1, 2010 Carswell 2 Alta 2364. 3 He was convicted after trial, so there is 4 not the mitigating effect of a guilty plea, 5 early or otherwise. 6 I have referred to both the fundamental 7 purpose and the fundamental principle of 8 sentencing. There are other principles that 9 must be considered as well. For the most 10 part, they are set out in Section 718.2 of the 11 Code. 12 Firstly, in subparagraph (a), the section 13 lists a number of specific aggravating and 14 mitigating factors. 15 Of note, subsection (a)(iii) of 16 Section 718.2 provides that "evidence that the 17 offender, in committing the offence, abused a 18 position of trust or authority in relation to 19 the victim"...shall be deemed to be an 20 aggravating circumstance. 21 I agree with the Crown that due to the 22 familial relationship between the accused and 23 his victim and the fact that they were both 24 sleeping at their grandmother's house, the 25 accused to some extent abused a position of 26 trust when committing the crime on which he is 27 now being sentenced. However, also of Official Court Reporters 7 1 particular importance in this case, subsection 2 (e) of 718.2 states all available sanctions 3 other than imprisonment that are reasonable in 4 the circumstances should be considered for all 5 offenders with particular attention to the 6 circumstances of aboriginal offenders. 7 Ipeelee, the recent Supreme Court of 8 Canada decision to which I have already 9 referred, explains and clarifies what it held 10 in R. v. Gladue, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688, 13 years 11 ago. The Court also makes observations of 12 common errors that have been made in the 13 aftermath of Gladue by both trial Courts and 14 Courts of Appeal. 15 At paragraphs 59 and 60 of Ipeelee, the 16 majority states: 17 59. The Court held, 18 [in R. v. Gladue] therefore, that 19 Section 718.2(e) of the Code is a 20 remedial provision designed to 21 ameliorate the serious problem of 22 overrepresentation of aboriginal 23 people in Canadian prisons and to 24 encourage sentencing Judges to 25 have recourse to a restorative 26 approach to sentencing (Gladue, at 27 para 93). It does more than Official Court Reporters 8 1 affirm existing principles of 2 sentencing; it calls upon Judges 3 to use a different method of 4 analysis in determining a fit 5 sentence for aboriginal offenders. 6 Section 718.2(e) directs 7 sentencing Judges to pay 8 particular attention to the 9 circumstances of aboriginal 10 offenders because those 11 circumstances are unique and 12 different from those of 13 non-aboriginal offenders (Gladue, 14 at para 37). When sentencing an 15 aboriginal offender, the Judge 16 must consider: 17 (a) the unique systemic or 18 background factors which may have 19 played a part in bringing the 20 particular aboriginal offender 21 before the courts; and 22 (b) the types of sentencing 23 procedures and sanctions which may 24 be appropriate in the 25 circumstances for the offender 26 because of his or her particular 27 aboriginal heritage or connection Official Court Reporters 9 1 (Gladue, at para 66). Judges may 2 take judicial notice of the broad 3 systemic background factors 4 affecting aboriginal people 5 generally but additional 6 case-specific information will 7 have to come from counsel and from 8 the pre-sentence report (Gladue, 9 at paras 83-84). 10 60. Courts have, at times, 11 been hesitant to take judicial 12 notice of the systemic and 13 background factors affecting 14 aboriginal people in Canadian 15 society (see, e.g., 16 R. v. Laliberte, 2000, SKCA 27, 17 189 Sask. Reports 190). To be 18 clear, courts must take judicial 19 notice of such matters as the 20 history of colonialism, 21 displacement, and residential 22 schools and how that history 23 continues to translate into lower 24 educational attainment, lower 25 incomes, higher unemployment, 26 higher rates of substance abuse 27 and suicide and, of course higher Official Court Reporters 10 1 levels of incarceration for 2 aboriginal peoples. These 3 matters, on their own, do not 4 necessarily justify a different 5 sentence for aboriginal offenders. 6 Rather, they provide the necessary 7 context for understanding and 8 evaluating the case-specific 9 information presented by counsel. 10 Counsel have a duty to bring that 11 individualized information before 12 the Court in every case, unless 13 the offender expressly waives his 14 right to have it considered. In 15 current practice, it appears that 16 case-specific information is often 17 brought before the Court by way of 18 a Gladue report, which is a form 19 of pre-sentence report tailored to 20 the specific circumstances of 21 aboriginal offenders. Bringing 22 such information to the attention 23 of the Judge in a comprehensive 24 and timely matter relevant manner 25 is helpful to all parties at a 26 sentencing hearing for an 27 aboriginal offender, as it is Official Court Reporters 11 1 indispensable to a Judge in 2 fulfilling his duties under 3 Section 718.2(e) of the Criminal 4 Code. 5 At this point, I will add that in this 6 case I have the benefit of a very thorough and 7 helpful pre-sentence report which the author, 8 after being requested to do so by this Court 9 on December 21st of last year, advised that 10 she would address the case-specific 11 information referred to in the foregoing 12 passage. She undertook to address the Gladue 13 factors that I have requested she address and 14 she has succeeded admirably in that 15 undertaking. 16 At paragraph 73 of the majority's judgment 17 in Ipeelee, the Court explained how Gladue 18 principles can impact on the fundamental 19 principle of sentencing - proportionality. 20 I think that this paragraph is very 21 important: 22 73. First, systemic and 23 background factors may bear on the 24 culpability of the offender, to 25 the extent that they shed light on 26 his or her level of moral 27 blameworthiness. This is perhaps Official Court Reporters 12 1 more evident in Wells where 2 Iacobucci J. described these 3 circumstances as "the unique 4 systemic or background factors 5 that are mitigating in nature in 6 that they have played a part in 7 the aboriginal offender's 8 conduct". (Wells, at para 38 9 (emphasis added)). Canadian 10 criminal law is based on the 11 premise that criminal liability 12 only follows from voluntary 13 conduct. Many aboriginal 14 offenders find themselves in 15 situations of social and economic 16 deprivation with a lack of 17 opportunities and limited options 18 for positive development. While 19 this rarely - if ever - attains a 20 level where one could properly say 21 that their actions were not 22 voluntary, and therefore not 23 deserving of criminal sanction, 24 the reality is that their 25 constrained circumstances may 26 diminish their moral culpability. 27 As Greckol J. of the Alberta Court Official Court Reporters 13 1 of Queen's Bench stated, at para. 2 60 of R. v.Skani, 2002 ABQB 1097, 3 331 A.R. 50, after describing the 4 background factors that led to 5 Mr. Skani coming before the Court, 6 "[f]ew mortals could withstand 7 such a childhood and youth without 8 becoming seriously troubled". 9 Failing to take these circumstances 10 into account would violate the 11 fundamental principle of 12 sentencing - that the sentence 13 must be proportionate to the 14 gravity of the offence and the 15 degree of responsibility of the 16 offender. 17 I note that the Court places emphasis on those 18 last nine words. The quote continues: 19 The existence of such 20 circumstances may also indicate 21 that a sanction that takes account 22 of the underlying causes of the 23 criminal conduct may be more 24 appropriate than one only aimed at 25 punishment per se as Cory and 26 Iacobucci J. state in Gladue, at 27 para 69: Official Court Reporters 14 1 In cases where such factors 2 have played a significant role, it 3 is incumbent upon the sentencing 4 Judge to consider these factors in 5 evaluating whether imprisonment 6 would actually serve to deter, or 7 to denounce crime in a sense that 8 would be meaningful to the 9 community of which the offender is 10 a member. In many instances, more 11 restorative sentencing principles 12 will gain primary relevance 13 precisely because the prevention 14 of crime as well as individual and 15 social healing cannot occur 16 through other means. 17 At paragraph 74, the Court explains that 18 in order for sanctions to be effective and 19 appropriate, they may need to be tailored to 20 aboriginal values. 21 74. The second set of 22 circumstances - the types of 23 sanctions which may be 24 appropriate - bears not on the 25 degree of culpability of the 26 offender but on the effectiveness 27 of the sentence itself. As Cory Official Court Reporters 15 1 and Iacobucci JJ. point out, at 2 para. 73 of Gladue: "What is 3 important to recognize is that, 4 for many if not most aboriginal 5 offenders, the current concepts of 6 sentencing are inappropriate 7 because they have frequently not 8 responded to the needs, 9 experiences, and perspectives of 10 aboriginal people or aboriginal 11 communities". As the RCAP 12 indicates, at page 309, the 13 "crushing failure" of the Canadian 14 criminal justice system vis-a-vis 15 aboriginal peoples is due to 16 "fundamentally different world 17 views of aboriginal and 18 non-aboriginal people with respect 19 to such elemental issues as the 20 substantive content of justice and 21 the process of achieving justice". 22 The Gladue principles direct 23 sentencing Judges to abandon the 24 presumption that all offenders and 25 all communities share the same 26 values when it comes to sentencing 27 and to recognize that, given these Official Court Reporters 16 1 fundamentally different world 2 views, different or alternative 3 sanctions may more effectively 4 achieve the objectives of 5 sentencing in a particular 6 community. 7 I note that in this case the accused 8 presently resides in Yellowknife, but he does 9 so in order to assist in the care of his 10 mother. He is a longtime resident of this 11 community, he has close ties to this 12 community, and it is in this community that he 13 was born and raised and in this community that 14 the offence occurred. 15 The accused, notwithstanding his very 16 difficult background, has managed to stay out 17 of trouble up until June 22nd of last year 18 when he was 25 years of age. I think that if 19 it is possible to impose a sentence which 20 adequately addresses the fundamental principle 21 of sentencing and the fundamental purpose of 22 sentencing and keeps him out of jail - a place 23 where many of his fellow inmates would have 24 pro-criminal attitudes - such a sentence 25 should be imposed. 26 As stated, the accused is a 26-year-old of 27 Tli Cho descent with no criminal record. I Official Court Reporters 17 1 note that also given what the majority states 2 in paragraphs 81 to 83 of Ipeelee, it is 3 clearly no longer the case that an offender 4 must establish a causal link between 5 background factors and the commission of the 6 current offence before being entitled to have 7 those matters considered by the sentencing 8 Judge. 9 Behchok= is an aboriginal community 10 located 110 kilometres away from Yellowknife. 11 It is also a community where much of the 12 population maintains traditional skills 13 including those required for trapping, 14 hunting, and the preparation of traditional 15 foods and clothing. The Tli Cho language is 16 still widely spoken in Behchok=, 17 notwithstanding its proximity to Yellowknife 18 and the fact that it is accessible by road. 19 It is also a community that has some 20 significant social problems. Judging from the 21 size of the court dockets and the types of 22 charges which commonly come before this Court, 23 there appears to be a high incidence of 24 alcoholism and a growing incidence of the use 25 of illegal drugs. Court circuits to Behchok= 26 are very busy when you consider their 27 frequency and length and the fact that the Official Court Reporters 18 1 entire community has the population of 2 approximately 2000 people. 3 The accused was an only child who grew up 4 up in a home where alcohol was abused on a 5 continual basis. He witnessed significant 6 violence. For example, as a young man he saw 7 his mother pushed on the floor by a man who 8 then attempted to stab her while urged to do 9 so by his girlfriend. He recalls that on that 10 occasion his father was too intoxicated to 11 help his mother. His father was an alcoholic 12 and the accused often went without enough food 13 or clothing. His parents often partied in the 14 family home late into the night and 15 subsequently Mr. R. would have difficulty 16 staying awake in school. He recalls being 17 disciplined by his mother by her tying his 18 hands to a rod that was used to hang clothes 19 for one or two hours at a time. This was done 20 in order to teach him to listen. 21 His mother has been alcohol-free for the 22 last 15 years. He is her sole caregiver and 23 is responsible for many of the household 24 chores. His mother and father separated when 25 he was 19. He maintains contact with his 26 father who is now in poor health. He advises 27 that his father hunted before he was born but Official Court Reporters 19 1 did not teach the skill to him because he was 2 drinking too much when the accused was young. 3 However, the accused was taught by his uncle 4 how to net fish, hunt caribou, and run a 5 trapline. He was also taught the survival 6 skills that are necessary to these activities. 7 He and his uncle go hunting once a month for a 8 week at a time to harvest food and earn an 9 income by trapping. 10 The accused feels that his culture is a 11 large part of who he is and stated to the 12 author of the pre-sentence report that his 13 culture is what keeps his people's life alive 14 and "keeps the spirit going", to use his 15 words. He states as well that his family 16 roots are connected to the land. 17 As stated, the accused comes from a 18 difficult background. It appears that he was 19 bullied in school. He states that sometimes 20 when he is intoxicated he thinks about suicide 21 because of the difficulties that he has had in 22 his life. On such occasions, he thinks about 23 killing himself because he doesn't want to go 24 through the harsh times anymore. Clearly 25 there are times when he drinks to excess. He 26 also uses marijuana although he advises that 27 he wants to quit. Official Court Reporters 20 1 If I were to fail to take into account the 2 case-specific factors to which I have just 3 referred, I would not be in a position to 4 adequately assess proportionality; for the 5 reasons articulated in Ipeelee, I would not be 6 in a position to assess his moral 7 blameworthiness. The unfortunate, and in some 8 cases shameful, historical factors that I must 9 take judicial notice of allow me to place the 10 accused's background information in context. 11 The crime he committed is serious. There 12 was no guilty plea. From what is stated in 13 the pre-sentence report, he still does not 14 accept that he committed the offence before 15 the Court. I think to some extent this may be 16 due to the amount of alcohol he advised the 17 author of the pre-sentence report he consumed 18 prior to the offence, and his apparent lack of 19 memory. Such an attitude is not uncommon with 20 accused persons who are unable to remember the 21 offence committed. 22 To some extent, the accused blames his 23 victim for charging him and proceeding with 24 the matter now before the Court. On the other 25 hand, he does say that he is very sorry for 26 the victim. 27 Given the serious nature of the crime, I Official Court Reporters 21 1 am satisfied that the principle of 2 proportionality requires that the accused be 3 imprisoned. I am satisfied that his 4 imprisonment is necessary, notwithstanding the 5 background information that I have referred to 6 as it relates to his moral blameworthiness. 7 However, as is clear from case law, which I am 8 bound by, I must still carefully consider the 9 Gladue principles when determining both the 10 type and duration of his imprisonment. 11 He has no criminal record. He has been on 12 process with conditions for an extended period 13 of time, and it appears that he has been under 14 that process without difficulty. 15 Under all of the circumstances, I find 16 that a conditional sentence is appropriate. I 17 think that all of the criteria set out in 18 Section 742.1 have been met. 19 I make no finding as to whether or not 20 cases of digital penetration fall within the 21 category of major sexual assault as 22 articulated in cases such as Sandercock and 23 Arcand. I do note that I have not been 24 provided with any cases which specifically 25 state that digital penetration on an adult 26 person amounts to a major sexual assault. I 27 am not aware of any such cases (although I am Official Court Reporters 22 1 certainly aware of cases that provide that 2 digital penetration of a child, a very young 3 person, does amount to a major sexual 4 assault). 5 There are prior cases where digital 6 penetration has been part of the sexual 7 assault where jail has not been imposed. For 8 example, there is the 1990 case of 9 R. v. G. A., [1990] NWTJ No. 1172, where 10 Justice Richard of the Supreme Court of the 11 Northwest Territories imposed a suspended 12 sentence. This sentence was imposed several 13 years before the availability of the 14 conditional sentence as a sentencing option. 15 There will be a conditional sentence in 16 this case. It will be for a period of 18 17 months. During that time, the accused is 18 ordered to comply with the following mandatory 19 terms: 20 You will have to keep the peace and be of 21 good behavior. You will have to appear before 22 the Court when required to do so by the Court. 23 You will have to report to his conditional 24 sentence supervisor within two working days 25 and thereafter when required by the supervisor 26 and in the manner directed by the supervisor. 27 You will have to remain within the Official Court Reporters 23 1 jurisdiction of the Court unless written 2 permission to go outside that jurisdiction is 3 obtained from either the Court or the 4 supervisor. And you will be required to 5 notify the Court or supervisor in advance of 6 any change of name, or address, and promptly 7 notify the Court or supervisor of any change 8 of employment or occupation. 9 Also, there will be the following 10 discretionary terms: 11 The accused is to abstain absolutely from 12 the consumption of alcohol or other 13 intoxicating substances and the consumption of 14 drugs except in accordance with a medical 15 prescription. He is to perform a total of 240 16 hours of community service work. That is to 17 be done at a rate of no less than 15 hours per 18 calendar month beginning April 1st of this 19 year. This work is to be done at the 20 direction of and to the satisfaction of his 21 conditional sentence supervisor. He is to 22 participate in all counselling directed by his 23 conditional sentence supervisor in his or her 24 discretion. Such counselling will include 25 drug counselling and alcohol counselling. 26 Also, he is to attend any approved drug or 27 alcohol treatment program that his conditional Official Court Reporters 24 1 sentence supervisor deems appropriate. He is 2 to have no contact with his victim, or attend 3 within 10 meters of her place of residence or 4 employment unless approached by the victim. 5 Also, there will be a term of house arrest 6 for the first 12 months of this conditional 7 sentence. For the first 12 months of this 8 conditional sentence, he will not be allowed 9 to leave his place of residence. The 10 exceptions to this term will be as follows: 11 He will be allowed outside of his 12 residence to, firstly, attend necessary 13 meetings with his conditional sentence 14 supervisor, to perform his assigned community 15 service work, to attend counselling or 16 treatment required by his conditional sentence 17 supervisor. As well, he will be allowed 18 outside of his home once a day between the 19 hours of 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. to perform 20 necessary errands. Finally, with the written 21 permission of his conditional sentence 22 supervisor, he will be allowed outside of his 23 residence for the purpose of attending 24 employment, and that written permission will 25 include and take into account the time 26 necessary to get to and from his place of 27 employment. Official Court Reporters 25 1 There will be a further probation order 2 following the conditional sentence. It will 3 be for a period of one year. That will also 4 include the statutory terms which will be 5 reviewed with the accused. He will also be 6 required to report to his probation officer 7 within 48 hours of the end of his conditional 8 sentence and thereafter as directed. He will 9 be required to attend any and all counselling 10 directed by his probation officer. He will 11 not be allowed to consume alcohol or any other 12 intoxicating substances except in accordance 13 with a prescription provided by a doctor. So 14 he will not be allowed to have any contact 15 with the victim during the probation order 16 with the same terms and conditions set out in 17 the conditional sentence. There will be the 18 same counselling provisions as well although I 19 will not include treatment provisions in the 20 probation order. 21 There will be no discretionary firearms 22 prohibition order pursuant to Section 110. I 23 have considered whether or not one should be 24 imposed but given the complete absence of a 25 criminal record and the fact that no weapon 26 was used in the commission of this offence and 27 also taking into account the nature of the Official Court Reporters 26 1 assault, although it is serious, I think that 2 such an order is not required. 3 There will be an order that the accused 4 comply with the provisions of the Sex Offender 5 Registry Act for a period of ten years from 6 today's date. Such an order is now mandatory. 7 My understanding is that it is indeed the case 8 that the current provisions dealing with SOIRA 9 orders are retrospective. 10 There will be a DNA authorization as the 11 offence falls within the category of a primary 12 designated offences of which I have no option 13 but to make such an order. 14 There will be a $50 victim of crime 15 surcharge payable within 30 days of today's 16 date. Is that problematic, Mr. Bran? 17 MR. BRAN: That's reasonable, thank 18 you. 19 THE COURT: All right. Anything else, 20 counsel? 21 MR. LECORRE: No, Your Honour. 22 THE COURT: Well, I thank counsel for 23 their capable assistance in this matter. 24 THE COURT: Mr. Bran? 25 MR. BRAN: I am just wondering if there 26 was a residence requirement as part of the 27 CSO, there has been no address being Official Court Reporters 27 1 mentioned. 2 THE COURT: He will have to report, he 3 has got to stay in the Northwest Territories, 4 but no, I am not requiring that he live at any 5 particular place. The mandatory provisions 6 will require that he keep his conditional 7 sentence supervisor informed of his residence. 8 Thank you, counsel, I appreciate the very 9 capable work done prior to these proceedings. 10 I believe that that deals with the entire 11 docket. 12 MR. LECORRE: Yes, Your Honour. 13 THE COURT: Fine. 14 (ADJOURNMENT) 15 16 ------------------------------------- 17 18 Certified to be a true and accurate transcript pursuant 19 to Rules 723 and 724 of the Supreme Court Rules, 20 21 22 23 24 ____________________________ 25 Lois Hewitt, Court Reporter 26 27 Official Court Reporters 28
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.