Proceedings at Guilty Plea, Justice B.
Ontario Court of Justice, Fall 2015
Case Summary & Detailed Outcome:
The offender is a single male in his sixties, with no prior criminal record. He is ordinarily a person of good character, is well-supported in the community and has been a contributing member of society through his work. Four character reference letters were provided to the Court.
Over several years, the offender surreptitiously recorded the activities of many of his guests, both adults and their children, whom he invited to stay in his home while he travelled. During these times, he regularly encouraged these guests to invite their friends as well and also allowed the use of alcohol to underage guests. The seriousness of the offences are magnified by the breach of trust as the offender was someone many of the victims described in victim impact statements as a close family friend, “an uncle”, and “a second father”.
The offender had a complex system of seven cameras connected to two computers that recorded the activities of these guests in various areas of the home most of which would normally be expected to be private such as the bathroom and bedroom. The camera equipment was discovered by one of the victims using the apartment during the absence of the accused. The investigation revealed 17 individuals, including nine under the age of 18, all close friends and/or children of close friends of the accused. Seven victim impact statements were admitted to the Court.
The offender entered a guilty plea on the charges and admitted the offences as reported to the court in an agreed statement of facts. He expressed remorse for his actions and for the impact they have had on the victims. The offender sought treatment and was receiving therapy from Dr. Lisa Doupe at PWR. Reports of the offender’s progress in therapy were provided to the Court.
In addition to the joint submission for a global sentence of three years imprisonment with conditions that the accused provide a DNA sample to the DNA databank and register under the Federal Sex Offender Registry, the Crown also sought a forfeiture order in relation to property seized pursuant to the investigation and suggested the judge consider prohibition orders under s. 161(1)(c) and (d) CC restricting the accused’s access to locations and activities that would put him in contact with persons under the age of 16 and prohibition from using the internet or other digital network within the meaning of s. 342.1(2) CCC unless in accordance with conditions set by the Court.
The Crown cited the following aggravating factors:
• Seriousness of offences of voyeurism and possession or making child pornography
• Seven victim impact statements
• Breach of trust; victims were friends and children of friends
o Circumstances of the commission of the offences
o Extensive period of time over which the offences occurred
• The long-term and, in some cases, permanent damage to mental, physical and emotional health of victims
• Accused was a sophisticated computer user and used his specialized knowledge of cameras and computer equipment to affect his crime
Defence counsel cited the following mitigating factors:
• Agreed statement of facts
• Guilty plea – accepting responsibility
• Four character reference letters
• No evidence of distribution of materials recorded
• No prior criminal record
• 64 years of age at time of sentencing
• Potential impact of imprisonment
• Expression of remorse
• Rehabilitation through established commitment to on-going therapy and the progress made in treatment
Three year concurrent on 3 counts of 162.1(a) CCC.
Three years concurrent on 3 counts of 163.1(2) CCC.
One year concurrent on s. 163.1(4) CCC.
Accused to provide a sample of blood to the DNA databank for analysis.
Accused to register with the sex-offender registry for life.
Forfeiture of items seized as a result of search.
Order under s. 161.1(b) CCC – prohibited from seeking, obtaining or continuing any employment whether or not employment is remunerated or in a volunteer capacity that involves being in a position of trust or authority towards persons known to be under the age of 16.
Order under s. 161.1(b) CCC – prohibiting any contact, including communicating by any means, with a person who is known to be under the age of 16 years, unless under the supervision of a person whom the court considers appropriate.
Order under s. 161.1(d) CCC – prohibiting the offender from using the internet or other digital network to access child pornography or communicate with persons known to be under the age of 16 unless the offender does so in accordance with the conditions set by the court.
Order prohibiting the offender from accessing child pornography in any form whatsoever.
R. v. F.D.G., 1994 CanLII 7603 (NS SC)
R v Pelich, 2012 ONSC 3224 (CanLII)
R. v. Sharpe,  1 SCR 45, 2001 SCC 2 (CanLII)