Sexual assault
R. v. E.T.M.
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 pleaded guilty to one count of sexual assault of a 15-year-old in 2010, when he was in his early 30s. The Crown sought two and a half years and the defence 10 months plus probation. Justice Murray imposed 10 months in jail followed by two years of probation, saying she would have imposed one year but subtracted two months because the sentencing was adjourned after he had prepared to go to jail, and citing his guilty plea, lack of record and low risk to reoffend.
In the judge's words
1On the other hand, the purpose of sentencing is not to devastate a law-abiding, productive member of society because of an error in judgment, albeit a serious one, that he made over 14 years ago.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual assault (CC 271)
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 10 months in custody1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: S. Meijers
Defence: B. Martland, KC
Sources
- R. v. E.T.M., 2024 BCSC 2496 Court decision, CanLII, December 12, 2024
[4] Crown seeks a sentence of two-and-a-half years.
[4] … Defence submits that a sentence of 10 months plus two to three years' probation to follow is appropriate.
[12] Now, the mitigating factors. Mr. … has no criminal record.
[15] … On the other hand, the purpose of sentencing is not to devastate a law-abiding, productive member of society because of an error in judgment, albeit a serious one, that he made over 14 years ago.
[21] I sentence you to 10 months in jail followed by two years' probation.
- R. v. E.T.M., 2024 BCSC 2496 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia