Nunavut man jailed for vengeance-based sex attack on step-daughter
“S.N. decides to do what he has been accused of doing. This would be his revenge”
Justice Robert Kilpatrick said a man who sexually abused his step-daughter to gain vengeance against his common-law spouse “knew that what he was doing was morally reprehensible and legally wrong.” (FILE PHOTO)
A 32-year-old Nunavut man who sexually abused his 15-year-old step-daughter in an act of vengeance against his estranged common-law spouse has received an 18-month jail sentence.
That’s six months more than the minimum sentence set by the Criminal Code for the offence of sexual interference.
This sentence came with harsh words from Justice Robert Kilpatrick in a sentencing judgment released Aug. 25. (See judgment embedded below.)
“Inuit traditional values are centered on respect for others. This type of offence, and the breach of trust underlying it, is as abhorrent to the Inuit as it is to mainstream Canadian society,” Kilpatrick said.
On the night when he sexually molested the girl, the man, known only as S.N., was quarrelling with his common-law spouse of 12 years, the judgment said.
Called C.D. in the judgment, S.N.’s spouse was not doing the dishes as often as S.N. wanted her to and they got into a heated argument. The spat quickly deteriorated into name-calling and verbal abuse.
C.D. accused S.N. of having sex with his step-daughter. Then she refused to have sex with S.N. until after he was tested for a sexually transmitted infection.
For some time, S.N. brooded over the false accusation, the judgment said.
“His anger grows. S.N. decides to do what he has been accused of doing. This would be his revenge,” the judgment says.
Later that night, S.N. slipped into a bedroom where three children slept on a bed. The girl, known as A.B., was lying on the outside of the bed and was easily accessible, the judgment said.
“S.N. pulls down A.B.’s panties, exposing her genitals and buttocks. He fondles A.B.’s vagina. He then attempts to penetrate A.B. from behind. He is not successful, however. A.B. flees the bed, the bedroom, and the house,” the judgment said.
The next day, A.B. told her aunt about what happened and she was taken to the police station.
“When C.D. finds out, she is furious. The relationship with S.N. ends abruptly. C.D. eventually moves back to her home community. The family disintegrates. The child protection authorities get involved,” Kilpatrick said.
“A.B. now lives in a group home. The children are all separated. Some are in care. A.B. blames herself for the breakup of her family. She blames herself for the breakdown of her parents’ relationship,” Kilpatrick said.
“She misses those of her siblings who are now inaccessible to her. Her life will never be the same. She is devastated by these events.”
A.B. had lived with her biological father for some time before this offence, Kilpatrick said, and had returned to S.N.’s home about a year before the offence occurred because she has been sexually abused by another man in that home.
“As a result of this earlier victimization, A.B. was as emotionally fragile as she was vulnerable. A.B. had been raised since about the age of four by both S.N. and C.D. A.B. had every right, and every expectation, to be safe in her family home. She had every right, and every expectation, to be protected by her step-dad, not violated by him.”
S.N. pleaded guilty to a single indictable count of sexual interference.
“S.N. has accepted responsibility for this offence. He has remorse. His guilty plea is consistent with this remorse. S.N. is entitled to receive credit in mitigation of sentence for entering a guilty plea,” Kilpatrick said.
If he hadn’t pleaded guilty and expressed remorse, that “the sentence would likely have fallen well within the range required for the federal penitentiary,” Kilpatrick said.
Kilpatrick suggested he receive intensive sex offender programming before his release and that he serve his sentence at the Rankin Inlet Healing Facility, “if deemed suitable for the programming available at this facility.”
Before that, S.N. had never been convicted of a criminal offence.
He was brought up in a good family, learning land skills and speaking Inuktitut and later English. He has a solid work history, was a good provider to his former family and maintained good relations with his siblings and with other members of his extended family, Kilpatrick said
“The absence of any criminal record or other history related to alleged breaches of court process leads to an inference that S.N. has good potential for rehabilitation,” he said.
But Kilpatrick said this was not a case where the offender didn’t know the law.
“This was not just a senseless ‘crime of opportunity’ that can be passed off to some form of intoxication and a ‘spur of the moment’ loss of inhibition. S.N. was completely sober when he committed this offence. He knew that what he was doing was morally reprehensible and legally wrong,” Kilpatrick said.
The moral culpability of an adult who harms a vulnerable teen for his sexual gratification is “very high,” the judge said.
Kilpatrick also urged the Nunavut Department of Child and Family Services to move quickly to provide intensive therapeutic counselling to A.B.
“This is needed to rebuild A.B.’s battered self-image. If qualified therapeutic help is not available in Nunavut, then it should be. The court urges the department to consider a referral to an outside agency if necessary to ensure that the needs of this adolescent victim are adequately addressed in a timely manner,” he said.
In addition to that jail term, the man will serve a two-year period of probation after his release and live under many conditions, including a 20-year listing on the sex offender registry.
(0) Comments