Sexual assault of a person under 16
R. v. P.S.K.
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 of a child, committed repeatedly between 1997 and 2002 while he was in a position of trust towards her. The Crown sought six years in custody; amicus curiae proposed four years. Justice Maisonville imposed four years of imprisonment, saying a sentence in the range of five to six years may have been appropriate but reducing it because of the offender's age of 80.
In the judge's words
1However, I am mindful of his age and the other issues that I have mentioned. While an appropriate sentence may have been in the range of five to six years, as a consequence of his age, an appropriate and fit sentence is four years incarceration.
The record
- Convicted of
- Sexual assault of a person under 16 (CC 271 U16)
- Prior convictions
- 0 prior convictions1
- At the time of the offence
- Not stated1
- Defence asked for
- 4 years in custody1
- Appeal
- Not yet checked
- Counsel
- Crown: M. LeHouillier
Defence: C. Senini (amicus curiae); offender self-represented
Sources
- R. v. P.S.K., 2026 BCSC 1293 Court decision, CanLII, June 18, 2026
[24] The Crown submits that a fit sentence for Mr. … is six years incarceration
[26] Amicus curiae, Ms. Senini, for Mr. … submits that an appropriate sentence, given his age of 80 years, is four years.
[18] Mr. … has no prior criminal record.
[74] However, I am mindful of his age and the other issues that I have mentioned. While an appropriate sentence may have been in the range of five to six years, as a consequence of his age, an appropriate and fit sentence is four years incarceration.
[74] However, I am mindful of his age and the other issues that I have mentioned. While an appropriate sentence may have been in the range of five to six years, as a consequence of his age, an appropriate and fit sentence is four years incarceration.
- R. v. P.S.K., 2026 BCSC 1293 Court decision, Courts of British Columbia