R.#v.#W.E.J.M.,#2009#ONCA#844

More documents

Recommendations

Info

victims, witnesses and justice system participants in the criminal justice process; (e) whether effective alternatives are available to protect the identity of the victim, witness or justice system participant; (f) the salutary and deleterious effects of the proposed order; (g) the impact of the proposed order on the freedom of expression of those affected by it; and (h) any other factor that the judge or justice considers relevant. (8) An order may be subject to any conditions that the judge or justice thinks fit. (9) Unless the judge or justice refuses to make an order, no person shall publish in any document or broadcast or transmit in any way (a) the contents of an application; (b) any evidence taken, information given or submissions made at a hearing under subsection (6); or (c) any other information that could identify the person to whom the application relates as a victim, witness or justice system participant in the proceedings. 2005, c. 32, s. 15. 486.6 (1) Every person who fails to comply with an order made under subsection 486.4(1), (2) or (3) or 486.5(1) or (2) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. (2) For greater certainty, an order referred to in subsection (1) applies to prohibit, in relation to proceedings taken against any person who fails to comply with the order, the publication in any document or the broadcasting or transmission in any way of information that could identify a victim, witness or justice system participant whose identity is protected by the order. 205, c. 32, s. 15. CITATION: R. v. W.E.J.M., 2009 ONCA 844 DATE: 20091130 DOCKET: C48070 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO Laskin, Feldman and LaForme JJ.A. BETWEEN: Her Majesty the Queen Appellant And W.E.J.M.
Respondent Jamie Klukach, for the appellant Paula Rochman, for the respondent Jonathan Rudin and Mandy Eason for the intervener, Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto Heard: May 19, 2009 On appeal from the sentence of Justice Frances P. Kiteley of the Superior Court of Justice dated November 6, 2007. Feldman J.A.: [1] Following his pleas of guilty and subsequent convictions on two counts of aggravated sexual assault and two counts of choking to enable the commission of aggravated sexual assault, a 16-day sentencing hearing was held to determine whether the respondent should be declared either a dangerous or a long-term offender. The trial judge declared the respondent to be a long-term offender and imposed a determinate sentence of 14 years and 8 months together with 10 years supervision in the community. The Crown appeals the sentence, and asks this court to find that the respondent is a dangerous offender, or order a new hearing. FACTS [2] The respondent had a serious criminal record for four sexually-motivated offences prior to his guilty pleas on the predicate offences for which he was sentenced as a long-term offender. [3] When he was 19 years old, he pled guilty to sexual assault on his seven year old female cousin. He had inserted his finger into her vagina and forced her to perform oral sex on him. At the same time he pled guilty to aggravated sexual assault on his 31 year-old female cousin. He raped her, having made a bet with another man that he could have sex with her. As she refused sex with him, he punched her in the head and face, broke a beer bottle on her face and held a kitchen knife to her throat, threatening to kill her if she did not pull down her pants. The pre-sentence report for the aggravated sexual assault conviction showed that the respondent had indicated that he derived “excitement and gratification in degrading and terrorizing his victims.” He was sentenced to a total of eight years for the two offences. [4] While in custody for these two offences, the respondent committed two assaults on female staff members. In 1998, while incarcerated in the Saskatoon Regional Psychiatric Centre, he tried to push a female staff member back into the washroom as she was leaving it. He pled guilty to assault and admitted that he had intended to have sex with her. He received a sentence of six months consecutive to the time he was serving already. In 2002, in the Kingston Regional Treatment Centre, the respondent again grabbed a female corrections officer and forced her into a washroom, telling her to shut up. When she screamed for help, he released her and ran. He pled guilty to forcible confinement and assaulting a peace officer and received a sentence of 12 months consecutive. [5] The respondent served his entire sentence for these four previous offences of almost ten years to warrant expiry. Seven months after his release, he committed the predicate offences: two violent sexual assaults within nine days on two women, one a sex trade worker and the other a woman who told the respondent that she was a former sex trade worker. In the first incident, the respondent approached the woman and asked for a “blow job.” She said she was finished for the night, but for $20 she would take him to another woman. On the way, he strangled her from behind with a cloth belt, violently choking her, and forced her to perform oral sex and have vaginal intercourse. In the second incident, nine days later, he asked a woman if she
Page 1: R.#v.#W.E.J.M.,#2009#ONCA#844 2009-
Page 5 and 6: drugs and alcohol. While under the
Page 7 and 8: account also. So sometimes it’s d
Page 9 and 10: [38] The big issue for the court wa
Page 11 and 12: to confirm that (i) you are not tak
Page 13 and 14: to conclude that, contrary to the d
Page 15: [66] The Crown appeal is therefore

R.#v.#W.E.J.M.,#2009#ONCA#844

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?