La Mauviette75, on 28 February 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:
and you explained it very well. i find it very interesting, and i am not an attorney in Canada. i would really appreciate if you could explain to me why a jail sentence was appropriate. is this kind of sentence commonplace for this kind of crime? i understand this is battery, but is there a minimum sentence? not taking into account intent, is there any reason this defendant was sentenced to jail, apart from the judge's discretion? (reading this, i can tell how it could seem like i'm being sarcastic or whatnot, but i am genuinely interested, and i'm dead serious)
edit: and by the way, whether it's the law or not in canada, i still think it's completely excessive.
In this case Tremblay was initially charged with two counts of assault but pleaded guilty to one count.
There is no mandatory minimum sentence for assault and the maximum in this case would be six month imprisonment.
Per the Criminal Code assault is a "hybrid" offence - charged by indictment or summarily at the discretion of the Crown prosecutor as are the majority of Criminal Code of Canada offences:
266. Every one who commits an assault is guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years; or
(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
In this case the charges were proceeded with summarily as elected by the Crown so the maximum punishment would be:
787. (1) Unless otherwise provided by law, everyone who is convicted of an offence punishable on summary conviction is liable to a fine of not more than five thousand dollars or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months or to both.
In this case the sentencing judge, Judge Patrick Chen. imposed a greater sentence than that being sought by the Crown - the Crown asked for a sentence of 30 days under house arrest and probation, while the defence put forward the possibility of a suspended sentence or large fine.
Judge Chen focused upon the fact the victims were children assaulted by an adult and emphasizing the principle of general deterrence noting that the attack was akin to a “cowardly sucker punch on an unsuspecting victim.”:
“Society will not tolerate the assault of children by adults”
“(The sentence is) a signal to other parents heavily involved in the sporting activities of their children that they must be seen as models of good and acceptable behaviour and not as instigators of violence and of riotous behaviour.”
“Win or lose, this was just a game. This was the last place anyone would have expected an assault to take place and the very last place that one would have expected an adult to assault a child.”
And this was not a first offence as Tremblay was already on a one-year probation order following previous assault conviction.
The judge would be guided by the Criminal Code at s. 718 "Purpose and Principles of Sentencing" which include
718.2 A court that imposes a sentence shall also take into consideration the following principles:
(a) a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances relating to the offence or the offender, and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing,
(ii.1) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused a person under the age of eighteen years
Edited by Wetcoaster, 01 March 2013 - 01:36 AM.