A man convicted of sexual assault and assault was originally sentenced to 20 months of home confinement, but the Court of Appeal overturned that light sentence and decided not to impose imprisonment.
The defendant, an Iranian national and postgraduate student at Laurentian University, had mentored a student who arrived from Iran to attend the university. He forced her into sexual intercourse, videotaped the encounter, and later threatened to send the video to her family in Iran.
The victim reported the abuse to police after the defendant demanded sex under threat of releasing the videotape. He was charged with four counts of sexual assault, two of assault, and one of unlawful confinement. A jury convicted him on one count of sexual assault and one of assault.
The Crown sought a three- to four-year prison term, but the Superior Court imposed a 20-month conditional sentence to be served at home. The Court of Appeal upheld the convictions but agreed that a prison term would have been appropriate. It noted that conditional sentences are rarely suitable for cases involving penetration.
The appellate court substituted a three-year sentence but stayed its execution, stating that reincarceration would disrupt the defendant’s employment and housing and hinder rehabilitation. The decision was made on the basis that it was not in the interests of justice to imprison the defendant at this point. The court emphasized that the sentence appeal and substitution addressed denunciation and deterrence without requiring imprisonment.
The victim’s impact statement highlighted lasting fear and distrust of physical contact, as well as insecurities in her current relationship. The seriousness of the offences has been acknowledged through the substituted sentence.
As a result, the defendant remains free to remain in the community while the court maintains that the gravity of the offences has been recognized.
