Sexual interference, Invitation to sexual touching
R. v. P.R.J.
A publication ban applies. The offender is not named.
- Below the Crown's ask
- No jail for a violent offence
Sentence and the Crown's position
A conditional sentence is served in the community, usually under house arrest. It counts as no custody here.
What the law allows
The offender was found guilty after trial of sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching for offending on one occasion in about July 2018 against a child aged seven or eight in her care. The Crown sought four years in jail. Justice Davies imposed a 23-month conditional sentence, with 12 months of house arrest, followed by two years of probation, finding that the offending was a single occurrence while she was intoxicated and that a conditional sentence was more likely than jail to promote her rehabilitation.
In the judge's words
1For the following reasons I find that a conditional sentence order will not only appropriately address the necessary sentencing objectives of general and specific denunciation and deterrence but, more likely than would her imprisonment, also aid in achieving another important sentencing objective by promoting the rehabilitation of the P.R.J.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual interference (CC 151)
- Invitation to sexual touching (CC 152)
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: D. Blumenkrans
Defence: M.A. Newcombe
Sources
- R. v. P.R.J., 2021 BCSC 2537 Court decision, CanLII, December 13, 2021
[12] Relying upon all of those principles Crown Counsel submitted that P.R.J. should be sentenced to 4 years in jail for her sexual offending … [13] As I stated during submissions on this sentencing hearing I do not consider that a 4 year sentence of imprisonment would be an appropriate sentence in all of the circumstances.
[14] I say that because: P.R.J. is a first-time offender; … she has never previously been before the courts.
[23] For the following reasons I find that a conditional sentence order will not only appropriately address the necessary sentencing objectives of general and specific denunciation and deterrence but, more likely than would her imprisonment, also aid in achieving another important sentencing objective by promoting the rehabilitation of the P.R.J.
[24] In result, on Counts 1 and 2 of the indictment (with the sentence on each to be served concurrently) I sentence P.R.J. to a conditional sentence order of 23 months to be served in the community. That conditional sentence will be followed by a probation order of a further two years.
- R. v. P.R.J., 2021 BCSC 2537 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia