Sexual interference
R. v. S.M.P.
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 found guilty after trial of sexual assault and sexual interference with a 12-year-old girl over a period between 2020 and 2022; the sexual assault count was conditionally stayed. The Crown sought seven years in custody and the defence three to four years. Justice McDonald imposed six years for sexual interference, finding that Gladue factors somewhat reduced his moral blameworthiness but that a substantial penitentiary term was required because he had reoffended after a prior sentence and treatment for a sexual offence against a child.
In the judge's words
1However, in this case given all of the circumstances, including that S.M.P. has received a prior conditional sentence for a sexual offence against a child and completed treatment and programming for sexual offending in the past and yet he reoffended. I find that substantial period of incarceration is the only sentence that adequately addresses the need for denunciation and deterrence and which also recognizes the gravity of offence, the need to protect the public, and S.M.P.'s moral culpability, even after accepting that his moral culpability is reduced somewhat.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual interference (CC 151)
- 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: J. Vivian
Defence: S. Sheets
Sources
- R. v. S.M.P., 2025 BCSC 1980 Court decision, CanLII, October 6, 2025
[41] The Crown submits that a custodial sentence of 7 years is appropriate along with a variety of ancillary orders.
[42] The defence submits that a custodial sentence of 3-4 years is appropriate due to the circumstances.
[89] … However, in this case given all of the circumstances, including that S.M.P. has received a prior conditional sentence for a sexual offence against a child and completed treatment and programming for sexual offending in the past and yet he reoffended. I find that substantial period of incarceration is the only sentence that adequately addresses the need for denunciation and deterrence and which also recognizes the gravity of offence, the need to protect the public, and S.M.P.'s moral culpability, even after accepting that his moral culpability is reduced somewhat.
[94] I sentence you to six years of incarceration in respect of the offence of sexual interference contrary to s. 151 of the Code.
- R. v. S.M.P., 2025 BCSC 1980 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia