Appeal court ups penalty in child sex case

A Saskatoon man’s sentence for child luring and sexual exploitation has been increased to a threeyear penitentiary term after the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal found the initial sentence unfit.

Jason Howard McLean, 22, was sentenced last August to two years less a day in jail after the judge decided a longer sentence, which would by law have to be served in a federal prison, would be “crushing.”

However, given the timing of the appeal court’s decision — nearly a year after McLean started serving his sentence — it’s unclear whether he will be transferred to prison or remain in provincial jail, said his lawyer, Kevin Hill.

“There’s a distinct possibility he won’t go to the pen, but that remains to be determined,” Hill said, noting corrections officials are in the process of recalculating McLean’s sentence.

When he was 18 years old, McLean began online relationships with four female victims aged between 12 and 14.

He convinced them to send him sexually explicit photos and videos and threatened them when they tried to refuse.

He pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography, making child pornography, luring, extortion and sexual interference.

The Crown argued for a six-year sentence.

In the appeal court decision, Justice Ralph Ottenbreit, with Justices Neal Caldwell and Jacelyn Ryan-Froslie concurring, found that if consecutive sentences for all the crimes were added up, they would amount to six years.

The appeal court also agreed with the trial judge that the principle of totality — that combined sentences should not be “unduly long or harsh” — applied to the case.

However, Ottenbreit wrote that the trial judge had not correctly applied the totality analysis, specifically as it related to whether each charge should receive concurrent or consecutive sentences.

The sentence for sexual interference, which related to McLean sexually touching one of the victims, should attract a consecutive sentence to the child porn-related charges, Ottenbreit wrote.

He therefore varied the sentence to include one year plus one day consecutive on the sexual interference charge, plus two years less a day on the remainder of the charges, resulting in a three-year sentence.

“Mr. McLean’s good prospects for rehabilitation, the absence of a criminal record, his guilty plea and his remorse must be given some effect in the totality analysis.

“While on the low side, a total sentence of three years incarceration is fit in the circumstances,” Ottenbreit wrote.