‘An abuse of trust of the highest order’
Father gets prison time for violating daughter's sexual integrity
A Lower Sackville man has been handed a two-year prison sentence for sexually assaulting his daughter by regularly applying cream to her genitals after they showered together and by shaving her pubic region when she was 10 or 11 years of age.
The 51-year-old offender cannot be named because of a publication ban on the identity of the victim. The offence took place between January 2008 and January 2014.
The man was sentenced May 1 in Dartmouth provincial court by Judge Bronwyn Duffy, who said the offence was “an abuse of trust of the highest order, involving a father and his daughter,” and was committed “over years and on multiple occasions.”
The accused stood trial in Dartmouth provincial court last November on four charges.
In January, Duffy found the man guilty of sexual assault but acquitted him on charges of sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching.
A charge of incest was dismissed during the trial, after the Crown closed its case.
The judge heard sentencing arguments in March. Crown attorney Stacey Gerrard recommended a prison term of three to four years, while defence lawyer Peter Kidston requested a conditional sentence of two years less a day, to be served in the community.
“My task is to formulate a ‘fair, fit and principled sanction’ that is individualized to (the offender), that considers parity, and that in the ultimate analysis is proportionate, reflecting the gravity of the offence, the offender’s degree of responsibility and the unique circumstances of this case,” Duffy said in her sentencing decision, which was released in writing Friday.
The complainant was a 22-year-old university student when she testified at trial last fall.
The man took the stand as well, admitting he rubbed the cream on the girl and shaved her pubic hair but denying the conduct was for his own sexual gratification.
Based on the evidence, the judge determined the man’s actions “constituted an objective violation” of his daughter’s sexual integrity.
In a presentence report, the man acknowledged that had he known the conduct was illegal, he “would not have done it.”
The prosecutor read the young woman’s victim impact statement into the record at the sentencing hearing.
“(The victim) detailed how she would, by times, stop eating to the point of requiring hospitalization, that she is continuing to experience trust issues, that she endured nightmares about her childhood, that she regularly flinches when someone touches her,” Duffy said in her decision.
“The victim reports she became suicidal, developed agoraphobia, and withdrew from university for a time. The victim has experienced extensive physical and emotional loss.”
In her analysis, the judge decided a conditional sentence would not be appropriate in this case.
“There are some circumstances where the need for deterrence calls for a carceral sentence,” Duffy said.
“I cannot see my way to the imposition of a communitybased sentence for an offence that involves sexual assault of the offender’s 10- to 11-yearold daughter, with a collection of aggravating factors, statutory and otherwise. The public is exposed to a degree that warrants a more deterrent effect. … A sentence of incarceration will be imposed.”
Duffy said the fit and proper sentence for the firsttime offender was two years in prison, followed by two years of probation.
“I agree prosecution that the public expects that an offence involving the sexual abuse of a child demands a sentencing focus on specific and general deterrence,” the judge said. “This is markedly so when prosecuted by indictment, (with) a maximum penalty of 14 years’ incarceration. I consider it exacerbated by the fact that the offences occurred in the home, and by the victim’s father and sole caregiver.
“With respect to gravity, I consider, as I must, that the offence occurred over a period of years, which increases its aggregate impact. … I characterize seriousness at the middle of the range of (sexual assault) cases involving children.”
While on probation, the man will be banned from possessing firearms and must take part in the province’s forensic sexual behaviour program and any counselling deemed necessary by his sentence supervisor.
The judge also ordered the father to provide a DNA sample for a national databank and register as a sex offender for 20 years after he gets out of prison.
In addition, Duffy imposed a 10-year firearms prohibition and another 10-year order prohibiting the man from having contact with children or attending parks, schools, community centres and other places frequented by kids.