Sexual interference, Invitation to sexual touching
R. v. K.J.H.
A publication ban applies. The offender is not named.
- Below the Crown's ask
Sentence and the Crown's position
What the law allows
The offender was convicted after trial of sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching involving a 14-year-old girl in June 2019; a sexual assault conviction was conditionally stayed. The Crown sought six to seven years and the defence three years. Justice Lyster imposed five years on each count, concurrent, with credit for 243 days, finding the defence position too lenient given his high moral culpability and exploitation of the complainant's vulnerability, but reducing the term from the Crown's range because of his age and health problems.
In the judge's words
1[75] In light of all of the relevant considerations, in particular … high degree of moral culpability, the inherently degrading and damaging nature of his offences on A.B., and his exploitation of A.B.'s extreme vulnerability, I find that the three‑year sentence proposed by the defence would clearly be too lenient and would not sufficiently meet the primary objectives of deterrence and denunciation.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual interference (CC 151)
- Invitation to sexual touching (CC 152)
- Prior convictions
- Not recorded
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 3 years in custody1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: C.A.P. Pine
Defence: M.D. Scheffelmaier
Sources
- R. v. K.J.H., 2023 BCSC 1203 Court decision, CanLII, June 21, 2023
[57] As I have mentioned, the Crown submits that a global sentence in the range of six to seven years would be appropriate; that being two sentences, one under s. 151 and one under s. 152, each of the same length, to run concurrently.
[62] The defence's other proposal was a global sentence of three years.
[75] In light of all of the relevant considerations, in particular … high degree of moral culpability, the inherently degrading and damaging nature of his offences on A.B., and his exploitation of A.B.'s extreme vulnerability, I find that the three‑year sentence proposed by the defence would clearly be too lenient and would not sufficiently meet the primary objectives of deterrence and denunciation.
[79] I conclude that a sentence of five years on each of your convictions under s. 151 and 152 of the Code, those five‑year sentences to run concurrently, is a fit and appropriate sentence. You will be given credit for time served. … By my calculation, as of today, you have served 162 days, which, with credit at time and a half, amounts to 243 days, and you will be given credit for that time served.
- R. v. K.J.H., 2023 BCSC 1203 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia