Sexual assault
R. v. B.T.B.
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 assault committed in Prince George in 2018. The Crown sought 30 to 36 months in a penitentiary; the defence sought 24 to 30 months or a conditional sentence. Justice Coval imposed 24 months' imprisonment, the low end of the range, citing the offender's loss of his teaching career, prosocial history and low risk to reoffend, and found a conditional sentence would be inconsistent with denunciation and deterrence.
In the judge's words
1In light of Maslehati, a conditional sentence would be inconsistent with the paramount sentencing objectives of denunciation and deterrence for sexual assaults with the aggravating factors in this case.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual assault (CC 271)
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 24 months in custody1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: J.D. Cliffe, K.C., A. Thapa
Defence: J.M. Duncan, H. Osso
Sources
- R. v. B.T.B., 2025 BCSC 2434 Court decision, CanLII, September 22, 2025
[25] As mentioned above, the Crown submits that a fit and proportionate sentence is imprisonment of 30 to 36 months in a penitentiary.
[30] They submit, however, that the collection of mitigating factors and positive social considerations presents a compelling case for imprisonment of 24 to 30 months and perhaps even a CSO with strict conditions.
[27] The Crown acknowledged the following mitigating factors militating in … favour: … no criminal record and no police activity while before the courts on this matter
[46] In light of Maslehati, a conditional sentence would be inconsistent with the paramount sentencing objectives of denunciation and deterrence for sexual assaults with the aggravating factors in this case.
[48] You are sentenced to 24 months of incarceration in a penitentiary.
- Criminal Code, s. 271 Record, Justice Laws Website
- R. v. B.T.B., 2025 BCSC 2434 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia