R. v. DeJaeger, 2015 NUCJ 02

nunavuumi iqkaqtuijikkut NUNAVUT COURT OF JUSTICE La Cour de justice du Nunavut Citation: R. v. DeJaeger, 2015 NUCJ 02 Date: 20150130 Docket: 07-02-27; 07-11-6; 07-11-8; 07-11-9; 07-11-34; 07- 11-36; 07-11-37; 07-11-40; 07-11-41; 07-11-44; 07- 11-54; 07-11-76; 07-11-77; 07-11-106; 07-12-1; 07- 12-2; 07-12-28; 14-11-83; 15-11-52; 24-12-20; 07-13- 85; 07-13-95. Registry: Iqaluit Crown: Her Majesty the Queen -and- Accused: Erik Jose De Jaeger ________________________________________________________________________ Before: The Honourable Mr.

Justice Kilpatrick Counsel (Crown): Doug Curliss Q.C., Barry Nordin Counsel (Accused): Malcolm Kempt Location Heard: Iqaluit, Nunavut Date Heard: January 19th-21st, 2015 Matters: Sentencing; Criminal Code s. 156 x23; s. 149 x 22; s.247(2) x 2; s.155 x 12; s.331(1) (

a) x 1; s.144 x 6; s.381(1) (

a) x 1; s.157 x 2; s.245(1) x 1; s.246.1 x 1. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(NOTE: This document may have been edited for publication) DISCLAIMER PAGE Restriction on Publication: Restriction on Publication: By court order made under

section 486.4 of the Criminal Code , any information that could identify the complainants shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way. Readers are cautioned that this judgment contains graphic descriptions of sexual activity that some may find disturbing and offensive. Table of Contents REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 I. INTRODUCTION 6 II. FACTUAL

SUMMARY OF THE OFFENCES 7 A. Count 5 – JA s. 247(2) Canadian Criminal Code [CCC] (unlawful confinement); Count 6 – JA s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) 7 B. Count 10 – MA s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 8 C. Count 12 – CA s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 8 D. Count 13 – LA s. 144 CCC (unlawful sexual intercourse) 8 E. Count 18 – LKC s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) 9 F. Count 24 – JI s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 12 G. Count 26 – LI s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 13 H. Count 33 – PI s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 13 I. Count 35 – DI s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/ female) 14 J.

Count 36 – MI s.149 CCC (indecent assault/female) 14 K. Count 37 – RI s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 15 L. Count 43 – LK s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) 15 M. Count 45 – ZN s.246.1 CCC (sexual assault) 16 N. Count 49 – VN s.149 CCC (indecent assault/female) 17 O. Count 51 – CN s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 17 P. Count 53 – GN s.149 CCC (indecent assault/female) 18 Q. Count 55 – CP s.155 CCC (buggery/anal intercourse) 18 R. Count 56 – CP s.155 CCC (buggery/anal intercourse); Count 57 – s.155 CCC (bestiality/dog) 19

S. Count 64 – MUO s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) 20 T. Count 73 LT s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 21 U. Count 75 MT s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 22 V. Count 76 TU s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 22 W. Count 1 TA s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) 23 III. VICTIM IMPACT – CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT 23 IV. CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT – SENTENCING PRINCIPLES 25 V. ANALYSIS 26 A. Aggravating offence characteristics 26 B. Mitigating offence characteristics 29 C. Mitigating factors related to the offender 29 D. Mitigating factors arising after the commission of the offences 31 E. Jurisdictional considerations 32 VI.

COUNT BY COUNT ANALYSIS 35 A. Count 6 (JA) Indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 35 A(i). Count 5 (JA) unlawful confinement s.247 (2) CCC 36 B. Count 10 (MA) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 36 C. Count 12 (CA) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 37 D. Count 13 (LA) Rape/Unlawful sexual intercourse s.144 CCC 37 E. Count 18 (LKC) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 38 E(i). Count 19 (LKC) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 38 E(ii). Court file #07-13-95 Count 1 (LKC) Rape/Unlawful sexual intercourse s.144 CCC 39 E(iii).

Court file# 07-13-95 Count 2 (LKC) Rape/Unlawful sexual intercourse s.144 CCC 39 E(iv). Court file#07-13-95 Count 3 (LKC) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 39 F. Count 24 (JI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 40 G. Count 26 (LI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 40 H. Count 33 (PI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 41 H(i). Count 34 (PI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 41 I. Count 35 (DI) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 42 J. Count 36 (MI) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 42 K. Count 37 (RI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 43 L.

Count 43 (LK) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 43 M. Count 45 (ZN) sexual assault on a female s.246. 1 CCC 44 N. Count 49 (VN) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 44 O. Count 51 (CN) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 45 P. Count 53 (GN) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 45 Q. Count 55 (CP) Buggery on a male s.155 CCC 46 Q(i). Count 56 (CP) buggery of a male s.155 CCC; Count 57 (CP) bestiality/dog s.155 CCC 46

Q(ii). Count 58 (CP) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 47 R. Count 64 (MO) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC 48 S. Count 73 (LT) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 48 S(i). Count 74 (LT) buggery of a male s.156 CCC 48 T. Count 75 (MT) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 49 U. Count 76 (TU) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 50 V. Court file# 07-13-85 (TA) Count 1 indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC 50 VII. SENTENCING 51 A. The application of the totality principle and assignment of concurrent and consecutive terms of imprisonment 51 B. The sentence 53 C. Credit for pre-trial custody 54 VIII.

CONCLUSION 58 A. Ancillary orders 58 B. Concluding Remarks 59 I. INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] Erik DeJaeger was posted to Igloolik to do God’s work. He was trained as an Oblate missionary. He was an ordained priest of the Roman Catholic Church. The parishioners of Igloolik expected their priest to be a doer of good deeds. The reality would be very different. [ 2 ] Between 1978 and 1982, Mr. DeJaeger methodically victimized the vulnerable children and youth of his remote arctic parish. He is now to be sentenced for 32 sex related offences. There are 23 individual victims involved, ten females and thirteen males.

All the victims are Inuit. The majority of the victims were between 9 and 13 years of age when these offences occurred. [ 3 ] This priest was expected to devote his life to God. He was in Igloolik to serve others. He was to teach by example. The conventions of the Roman Catholic Church hold the priest to be a moral exemplar of the Church’s teachings. There was an expectation that this priest would emulate the moral standards that were being taught from the pulpit. [ 4 ] Mr. DeJaeger’s many victims came to see this priest in an entirely different light.

Instead of moral probity, there was licentiousness and depravity. Instead of honesty and personal integrity, there was duplicity and hypocrisy. Instead of kindness, there was selfish self- gratification and disrespect. [ 5 ] Mr. DeJaeger knew that his parishioner’s religious beliefs would isolate those who disclosed their abuse. Most of this priest’s young victims feared that they would not be believed by their parents or their community if they challenged the sanctity of a “man of God”.

Where allegations of sexual misconduct contradict religious standards and expectations, disbelief is often the result. [ 6 ] A number of the victims had the courage to speak of their abuse to their parents. They were beaten for telling “lies” about the priest. [ 7 ] By debasing the sanctity of the priest’s holy office, Mr. DeJaeger has brought incalculable harm to the standing of the Roman Catholic Church and of the Oblate Order of which he is a part. He has breached a trust that is implicit in the priest’s relationship with his parishioners.

He has tarnished the well-earned reputation of those priests who have tirelessly served the Church with devotion and self- sacrifice in the remote regions of Canada.

[ 8 ] Mr. DeJaeger preyed upon the flock that he was tasked to nurture and protect. He was a wolf masquerading as a good shepherd. His life as a priest was a lie. The reputation and authority of this priest’s holy office was used to facilitate his predatory activity. [ 9 ] Mr. DeJaeger’s criminal misconduct was a profound betrayal of the many parents in Igloolik who entrusted their children to this priest’s pastoral care. This was a betrayal of the principles of the Oblates. This was a betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church and all it stood for as an institution. II. FACTUAL

SUMMARY OF THE OFFENCES A. Count 5 – JA s. 247(2) Canadian Criminal Code [CCC] (unlawful confinement); Count 6 – JA s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 10 ] JA was asked to go upstairs in the Mission by the priest DeJaeger to retrieve something. She does so. While in a dimly lit bedroom the priest enters and sits on a bed. JA is asked to sit beside him. JA does as she is told. The priest starts to fondle her genitals. JA tries to get away, but is restrained by Mr. DeJaeger. JA is forced to lie face down on the bed. JA’s right hand is then taped to a bedrail to prevent her from leaving. JA continues to squirm.

Her legs are then taped to the bottom bedrail. The priest gets behind JA on the bed. JA’s pants are pulled down. She then experiences severe pain in her rectum. She is unable to say what caused this. JA was told not to talk to others about what happened and then slapped on the side of her face. [ 11 ] JA was between 8 and 12 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 12 ] Mr. DeJaeger was convicted of these offences after a trial. B. Count 10 – MA s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 13 ] MA is asked to accompany the priest DeJaeger upstairs in the Mission. The priest says that he wants to show MA something.

Once upstairs, the priest DeJaeger sits on a couch in a large open area. He invites MA to sit on his lap. MA does as he is told. The priest then inserts his hand inside MA’s pants and fondles his genitals for what seemed to be a long time. [ 14 ] MA is told not to tell anyone about what happened. MA is told that if he tells anyone his father might be taken away. He is also told that he could have juice if he promised to keep the secret.

He is given juice after the incident by the defendant. [ 15 ] MA was between 8 and 12 years of age when this incident happened. [ 16 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence after trial. C. Count 12 – CA s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 17 ] CA is in a room adjacent to the kitchen in the lower floor of the Mission. CA is with two friends and all are engaged in building a cross out of spent bullet casings. The priest is watching the boys while seated on a chair. CA is suddenly grabbed from behind by the priest DeJaeger. CA is put on the priest’s lap.

While there, the priest fondles CA’s penis over his clothes causing it to become partially erect. CA squirms and gets off Mr. DeJaeger. The incident ends. [ 18 ] CA was between 12 and 16 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 19 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence. The facts alleged by the Crown were disputed by the defendant. A hearing was necessary to determine the basis of the defendant’s guilt. The victim was required to testify at this hearing.

D. Count 13 – LA s. 144 CCC (unlawful sexual intercourse) [ 20 ] The priest DeJaeger takes LA to a bedroom in the upstairs area of the Mission. There are no other adults or children around. The priest asks LA to get undressed and sit on a bed. LA does as she is told. The priest then tells LA that “he was going to do something bad to her”. LA gets scared. [ 21 ] The priest disrobes and plays with his penis for a while. The penis gets hard. The priest then has LA touch his penis. LA is put on her back on the bed by Mr. DeJaeger.

The priest then penetrates LA’s vagina with his penis while maintaining a grip on LA’s legs. LA cries out when this happens. She then blacks out for some time. [ 22 ] When LA recovers her memory she is bleeding heavily from her vagina. She is very scared and she is crying. She is picked up by the priest. She is taken to a toilet so she could bleed into the toilet. LA stays there for some time. She then goes to sit on the couch in the living room. The priest puts a plastic garbage bag on the couch where LA is seated to ensure that the couch is not bloodied.

There is a lot of blood. [ 23 ] This incident ends when a Mr. Kunnuk arrives upstairs. LA gets dressed quickly and leaves. She recalls hearing some shouting between Mr. Kunnuk and the priest as she does so. LA is not able to say what was being said or by whom. [ 24 ] When she gets home, LA tells her mother what the priest has done. LA’s mother refuses to believe her child. LA’s mother accuses LA of lying about what happened. LA is then beaten for lying. [ 25 ] LA was between the ages of 6 and 10 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 26 ] Mr. DeJaeger was convicted of this offence following a trial. E.

Count 18 – LKC s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 27 ] LKC is one of a number of older youth who volunteer to do clean-up at the Mission following mass and other church-related activities. LKC is encouraged to do this by her mother who was a devout Roman Catholic and avid church-goer. Clean-up is done after school and in the evening following the evening mass. Following clean-up, the youth would occasionally become involved in a game of hide and seek. The priest DeJaeger would join in.

LKC is between 14 and 18 years of age when the first incident occurs. [ 28 ] During one of these games the priest DeJaeger discovers LKC in her hiding-place. The other youth are still hiding. The priest briefly fondles LKC’s genitals and breasts over her clothing before running off to search for the others. LKC remembers Mr. DeJaeger panting or breathing heavily as he touches her. [ 29 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. (i).

Count 1 LKC s.144 CCC (unlawful sexual intercourse) [ 30 ] From time to time, the youth clean-up crew would be asked by the defendant to go and clean the upstairs portion of the Mission. The size of this crew varied. Sometimes there would only be two youth in attendance. On other occasions there would be many more. [ 31 ] On one occasion, the priest asked LKC to go into the attic area of the Mission to retrieve some Christmas ornaments for communion. The other youth remain downstairs. The priest DeJaeger follows LKC into the attic. He leads LKC to the left side.

In this area of the attic, hidden by stacked-up boxes, LKC discovers a bed made of multiple blankets and one white pillow.

[ 32 ] The priest has LKC lie down on this bed. She is told to lie on her side facing the boxes. The priest then pulls down her pants. LKC’s vagina is penetrated from behind by Mr. DeJaeger. The act of sexual intercourse continues for some minutes or seconds. When it is over LKC is cautioned not to speak about what had happened. The priest tells LKC that no one would believe her. [ 33 ] Once LKC gets downstairs in the Mission she experiences a wet discharge from her vagina. This causes her pants to get wet. Shortly after getting home, LKC starts to bleed. LKC tells her mother what had happened.

Her mother becomes very angry. Her mother tells LKC that priests are gods. They are healers. They wouldn’t do things like that. LKC was then beaten by her mother for telling a lie. LKC says that she grew to hate her mother for not believing her. [ 34 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. (ii). Count 2 LKC s.144 CCC (unlawful sexual intercourse) [ 35 ] Sometime later, LKC and her younger sister RK are invited upstairs by the priest. They are led to a couch in the living room area of the Mission.

Once there, the priest tells the two girls to touch each other’s breasts and vaginas on top of their clothing. They do this as requested. The priest watches. After some time, the priest DeJaeger asks the girls to touch each other under their clothing. The children comply and the priest again watches. The girls are ultimately asked by the priest to get on top of each other and rub their bodies together. They comply. The priest watches. [ 36 ] LKC is then led by the priest DeJaeger into the attic and taken to the hidden bed a second time. This time LKC is lying on her side and facing Mr. DeJaeger.

Her pants are pulled down and the priest again has sexual intercourse with her. He then tells LKC to leave. LKC waits downstairs in the Mission for her younger sister to join her. They then leave together. [ 37 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. (iii). Count 3 LKC s.149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 38 ] There was a third incident involving the defendant and this victim. LKC is downstairs in the Mission. There are a number of other children present. The priest again invites LKC to accompany him upstairs. LKC does what she is told.

Once upstairs the priest takes LKC to the couch in the living room. He unzips his pants and asks LKC to play with his penis. LKC does as she is told. Mr. DeJaeger’s penis gets hard. There is a terrible odour. As LKC masturbates the priest, a small child is heard coming up the stairs and the incident ends. [ 39 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. (iv). Count 19 – LKC s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 40 ] The priest DeJaeger joined LKC’s family for a spring hunt. He pitched his own tent some distance from the family tents. LKC is then pregnant with her first child.

She is 15 years of age. Prayers are said inside her mother’s tent. It is daytime. Following the prayers the others go outside the tent to eat. LKC is left alone momentarily with the priest. Mr. DeJaeger approaches LKC and touches her briefly on her groin. His hand then travels upwards to her stomach and then continues on to her breast. This touching occurs on top of the clothing. LKC gave no particular details about how this incident ended. [ 41 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. F. Count 24 – JI s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male)

[ 42 ] JI, together with a number of other children, were invited to sleep over at the Roman Catholic Mission by the priest. The sleepover is upstairs in the priest DeJaeger’s bedroom. The children sleep on the floor of the bedroom with bedding provided by the defendant. Food is provided to the children who attend. [ 43 ] At some point during the sleepover, JI is taken to the priest’s bed by Mr. DeJaeger. While there he is invited to look at a book. The priest then pulls down JI’s pants to his knees, fondles JI’s genitals, and attempts to masturbate him. While doing this, Mr.

DeJaeger is seated on the bed in front of JI. He is wearing gray underwear. The priest then places JI’s hands on Mr. DeJaeger’s erect penis and tries to get JI to masturbate him. JI pulls away when this happens. [ 44 ] JI was between 8 and 10 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 45 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence. The factual basis for the guilty plea was disputed however. A hearing was necessary to determine the facts. The victim is deceased, and did not have to testify on this hearing. G.

Count 26 – LI s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 46 ] This touching occurred when LI was between 9 and 10 years of age. LI is colouring with other children in the downstairs kitchen area of the Mission. He is suddenly picked up by the priest and placed on the priest’s knee. While there, the priest DeJaeger puts his hand inside LI’s pants and fondles LI’s penis. The duration of the fondling activity is unknown. After getting off the defendant’s lap, the priest pinches LI’s buttocks. This upsets LI. [ 47 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence. The factual basis for the plea was disputed.

A hearing was necessary to sort out the facts. The victim was required to testify about this allegation. H. Count 33 – PI s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 48 ] PI says that he, along with a number of other children, often stayed in the Mission after Sunday services were completed to play. On one occasion he is invited upstairs into the Mission living quarters by the priest DeJaeger along with the others. PI says that he is treated to some dried meat described as elephant jerky by Mr. DeJaeger. [ 49 ] The priest then asks PI to sit on his lap. PI does so. While on the priest’s lap, Mr.

DeJaeger fondles PI’s genitals over his clothing. PI is not sure how long this touching continued, but estimates that it may have lasted at least five minutes. There are other children in the room when this fondling activity takes place. They are engaged in other activities. [ 50 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence, but disputed the factual basis for the plea. A hearing was necessary to determine the facts. The victim was required to testify as part of this hearing. PI was between 8 and 11 years of age when this event occurred. (i).

Count 34 – PI s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 51 ] PI was again at the Mission playing with a friend LT. LT goes upstairs to see if he could get some treats from the priest. PI tags along hoping to get some juice or cookies. There are a number of children sitting on a couch playing board games on a coffee table. There is some cookies and some juice on the kitchen table. The priest is seated on a chair close to this table. PI is invited to sit on the priest’s lap by Mr. DeJaeger who refers to PI by the name “Peacha”. [ 52 ] After getting on the priest’s lap, PI is again fondled by Mr. DeJaeger.

This time however, the priest puts his hands inside PI’s pants to fondle PI’s genitals. The priest is breathing heavily as he does this. The fondling ends after approximately five minutes. The priest then invites PI to have cookies and juice. PI does so.

[ 53 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. I. Count 35 – DI s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/ female) [ 54 ] DI is in the Mission kitchen with a number of other children. The priest DeJaeger is seated on a kitchen chair. DI sits on the priest’s lap. While in this position the priest fondles DI’s vagina with his left hand over her clothing. DI feels very awkward. She is eventually returned to the floor by the Mr. DeJaeger and the incident ends. [ 55 ] DI was between 10 and 12 years of age when this offence was committed. [ 56 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial.

J. Count 36 – MI s.149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 57 ] MI was between 6 and 10 years old when this offence occurred. [ 58 ] This incident occurs at a summer fishing camp on the land. The location is unknown. MI’s grandparents are at the camp together with a number of children including MI and her older brother RI. [ 59 ] MI is playing outside the family tent when she is invited over to the priest DeJaeger’s tent for hot chocolate. The priest is seated inside his tent. He invites MI to sit in his lap while she has her hot chocolate. While there, he fondles MI’s genitals under her pants.

He digitally penetrates her vagina with his finger three times. MI estimates that this went on for approximately 10 to 15 minutes. MI was hurt by this and scared. [ 60 ] At some point MI hears her older brother RI outside the tent. The incident ends abruptly with the priest cautioning MI not to say a word about what happened to anyone or he would hit her. MI is told to leave by Mr. DeJaeger and she does so. She is crying as she leaves. [ 61 ] MI later discovers blood in her panties. [ 62 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence after trial. K.

Count 37 – RI s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 63 ] RI was between 10 and 13 years of age when this incident occurred. RI is camping on the land at a spot known as Uttuksivik or Maud Bay. It is summertime. RI is with his family. At some point, the priest DeJaeger joins the family and sets up his own tent at some distance from the others. [ 64 ] RI is invited by Mr. DeJaeger into the priest’s tent. While there, the priest pulls down RI’s pants and while fondling his genitals attempts to masturbate him. When this touching occurs, the priest has very cold hands.

RI says that this incident ends when RI pushes the priest away and leaves the tent. [ 65 ] RI says that he was told by the priest DeJaeger that if he told anyone about what he (the defendant) was doing no one would believe him because he was God’s helper.

[ 66 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence, but disputed the factual allegations behind the plea. A hearing was necessary to determine the facts. The victim was required to testify about the allegation at this hearing. L. Count 43 – LK s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 67 ] LK was between the ages of 5 and 7 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 68 ] LK is at the Mission with a number of other young children. Some of the kids are upstairs. The door leading upstairs is open. LK wants to get the other children downstairs so she could play with them. LK decides to go and get them.

LK goes upstairs by herself. She goes to a bedroom. The priest DeJaeger is there along with three or four children. [ 69 ] LK is asked to go and look out the window by the priest. LK is too little to see out, so she has to stand up on a chair. There is a good view from the window. It is a bright day. LK can see right down to the ocean. She sees people going about their business outside. [ 70 ] The priest then approaches LK from behind. He sits on a chair that is put immediately behind the chair on which LK is standing.

The priest puts an arm around LK’s waist and then slips his other hand inside LK’s pants to fondle her vagina with his fingers. At some point he digitally penetrates LK’s vagina. This touching goes on for an estimated five minutes. LK is very scared. LK cannot move away because she is being held securely by Mr. DeJaeger. [ 71 ] The incident ends when the priest stands up and approaches another child. LK then leaves the room and heads downstairs. [ 72 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. M.

Count 45 – ZN s.246.1 CCC (sexual assault) [ 73 ] On the day of the incident, ZN learned through her sister that a priest was coming to Pelly Bay for a visit. ZN went over to the Manse to meet the priest. When she got to the priest’s residence she found the door unlocked. She opened the door and walked inside. The priest DeJaeger was there. [ 74 ] The priest approaches ZN by the door and shakes her hand. He gives her a hug. Without a word, he then leads ZN to a different part of the residence. ZN thinks they are going to the kitchen for a friendly chat.

Instead, the priest leads her to a bedroom and pushes her down on the bed. ZN tries to get up. She is pushed back down. The priest removes ZN’s pants and then gets on top of her. He penetrates ZN with his penis and engages in full sexual intercourse without her consent. [ 75 ] ZN is not able to say how long she is on the bed with the priest DeJaeger. The priest says nothing to ZN during this incident. When the priest finishes, ZN tells him that she wants to go. She gets dressed. Before leaving she is grabbed by Mr. DeJaeger. She is told to tell no one about what has happened. ZN keeps her silence for years.

She feels dirty. She believes no one will trust her if she speaks of what happened. [ 76 ] ZN was approximately 33 years of age when this rape occurred. [ 77 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence after trial. N. Count 49 – VN s.149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 78 ] VN is at the Mission with a friend. The children are colouring somewhere on the first floor. The priest DeJaeger asks VN to come

upstairs with him. VN does so thinking that she is to be given a chore of some kind to do. VN is taken to a bedroom.VN is between 9 and 11 years of age. [ 79 ] Once in the bedroom the priest fondles VN’s vagina. He then removes the belt on his pants and drops his pants to his knees. VN had never seen a man’s penis before. The priest asks VN to play with his penis. He takes VN’s hand and puts it on his penis and shows VN what to do. Every time VN stops playing with his penis, Mr. DeJaeger would pull hard on VN’s ear. VN is forced to continue. The priest’s penis gets big and hard.

The priest ultimately grabs one of VN’s hands and puts it near his penis. Some warm white stuff comes out of his penis. The priest tells VN to lick his penis. She refuses to do so. Each time she refuses the priest pulls her ear harder. She eventually does what he asks. [ 80 ] This incident ends with the priest DeJaeger telling VN to go and wash her hands. VN indicates that her hands were “stinky”. VN is told not to talk to anybody about what happened. This was to be a secret between them. VN leaves the bedroom and goes downstairs. [ 81 ] When VN gets home she tries to tell her mother what had happened to her.

VN did not know that what had happened was sexual abuse, but she did not like what the priest had done to her by pulling her ears. VN’s mother gets angry. She says that VN is trying to make trouble. VN is then beaten by her mum for lying about the priest. [ 82 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence after trial. O. Count 51 – CN s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 83 ] CN is upstairs in the Mission. He is in the priest DeJaeger’s bedroom. The priest is seated in a chair. CN is asked to sit in the priest’s lap and he does so.

While in this position the priest unzips the fly on CN’s pants and fondles his penis. When this fondling activity occurs there are no other children in the room with CN. It is not known how long this fondling activity continued. CN was between 8 and 12 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 84 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence. The facts underlying the guilty plea were disputed however. A hearing was necessary to sort out these facts. The victim was required to testify at this hearing. P.

Count 53 – GN s.149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 85 ] GN frequently attended the Mission after school for religion classes taught by the Church. A number of children would be present for these classes. [ 86 ] On one occasion after school, GN is sitting on the priest DeJaeger’s lap. The priest is showing GN a National Geographic magazine that features a bare breasted little girl from Africa. The priest wraps his arms around GN’s waist. He references the picture and says to GN that she should “be like that”. While doing so he reaches up to fondle GN’s breast with a hand.

This touching was on top of GN’s clothing. The other children are colouring pictures on a coffee table when this happens. [ 87 ] GN was 7 or 8 years of age when this happened. [ 88 ] The defendant was convicted after trial of this offence. Q. Count 55 – CP s.155 CCC (buggery/anal intercourse) [ 89 ] CP was between six and eight when this first incident occurred. It is around Easter time in April. CP and his friends are playing out on the ice. They get cold and go inside the Mission to warm up. The priest DeJaeger is there. He leads CP upstairs to a windowless

room that is cold. The other children remain downstairs. [ 90 ] The room is dark. It has no furniture. It seems to be used for storage of some kind. [ 91 ] The priest shows CP his penis. He then takes off CP’s pants and underwear. He puts Vaseline on CP’s rectum. CP is turned away from the priest and is forced to bend over. The priest is gripping CP around the waist with both hands. CP then feels terrible pain in his rectum and he starts to cry. CP feels the priest DeJaeger’s penis penetrate his anus. [ 92 ] After he is finished, the priest forces CP to perform

an act of fellatio. The priest’s hands are gripping CP’s head and hair. Mr. DeJaeger is forcing CP’s head to move back and forth on his penis. CP cannot breathe. The priest ultimately ejaculates in CP’s mouth. CP describes this as being “yuk”. The priest DeJaeger then dresses CP and leads him downstairs to rejoin the other children. Before doing so, however, the priest warns CP not to talk to anybody about what happened. The priest tells CP that if he says anything, he would be lying. CP rejoins the others and pretends to colour.

At his first opportunity he leaves the Mission. [ 93 ] The defendant was convicted after trial of this offence. R. Count 56 – CP s.155 CCC (buggery/anal intercourse); Count 57 – s.155 CCC (bestiality/dog) [ 94 ] CP and his friend JU have been asked by the priest DeJaeger to come over to the Mission from time to time to feed the priest’s dog. JU and CP go over to the Mission together to do this. They enter the furnace room on the main floor of the Mission. The furnace room door is open. The priest is inside with the dog. CP sees the priest naked from the waist down. The dog is tied up.

The priest is standing behind the male dog gripping the animal’s hind-quarters. The priest DeJaeger is having anal intercourse with the animal and the dog is making noises. CP and JU try to leave, but it is too late. The priest withdraws from the animal. CP sees Mr. DeJaeger’s erect penis. [ 95 ] The priest closes the door to the furnace room and locks it. The lock is on the upper portion of the door and the boys cannot reach it. There is no other way out. [ 96 ] The priest then grabs CP. CP resists but he is too little and the priest is too strong. JU is trying to help by pushing against Mr. DeJaeger.

CP is picked up and bent over a table. His pants are pulled down, and the priest then penetrates his rectum with his penis. There is a small nail sticking out of the table. This digs into CP’s chest causing an injury that would eventually leave a scar. This scar is still visible on CP’s chest. [ 97 ] CP is told not to talk to his parents about what happened. He is then struck hard in the ear by Mr. DeJaeger. The door is opened and the two boys leave. CP says that he could not sit down comfortably for two or three days after this event. [ 98 ] The defendant has been convicted after trial of these offences. (i).

Count 58 – CP s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 99 ] A year passes from the events described in count 57. It is now May and CP hears that Father Lechat has returned to Igloolik. Father Lechat is well liked and respected by everyone. CP goes down to the Mission looking for Lechat and runs into the priest DeJaeger. There is no sign of Father Lechat. CP is taken to the CB radio room under the stairs on the main floor by the priest. The priest DeJaeger then pulls his own penis out of his pants and starts to play with it. CP tries to leave, but is pushed back away from the door.

He is ultimately forced to perform fellatio upon the priest. CP thinks that Mr. DeJaeger ejaculated again. [ 100 ] The defendant was convicted after trial of this offence.

S. Count 64 – MUO s. 149 CCC (indecent assault/female) [ 101 ] It is a Saturday during the winter of 1978. MUO walks over to the Mission to take confession. She is between 18 and 22 years of age. There are children playing outside. The doors to the Mission are locked, but the priest DeJaeger, dressed in civilian clothes, lets MUO in. Together they go to a small room. MUO kneels and starts to pray. The priest is sitting in a chair close to MUO. The priest asks MUO to speak up so he can hear her. [ 102 ] The priest then says that he wants to feel her heart beat. He suddenly puts a hand inside MUO’s shirt.

MUO stops praying. She is in shock. While fondling her breasts, the priest DeJaeger tells MUO that she smells nice. He asks MUO if she has a boyfriend. He says that he is better than MUO’s boyfriend. He starts to kiss MUO’s neck. MUO quickly stands up. The priest then starts to fondle MUO’s crotch area on top of her clothing. MUO pushes the priest away and then runs out of the Mission by the back door. [ 103 ] The defendant was convicted after trial of this offence. T. Count 73 LT s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 104 ] LT is in the kitchen area of the Mission.

He is seated on the priest DeJaeger’s lap at the kitchen table and is eating cream corn. LT remembers the priest saying to him that eating this cream corn was like eating “baby poop”. While LT is eating, the priest reaches down and fondles LT’s penis and buttocks over his clothing for a few minutes. This makes LT feel “weird”. LT is very young (between 7 and 11 years of age). He thinks that all white people are strange. He thinks that maybe this was a normal thing for white people to do. [ 105 ] The defendant was convicted after trial of this offence. (i).

Count 74 LT s. 155 CCC (buggery/male) [ 106 ] LT is playing with other children in the main part of the Mission. He gets thirsty, so he goes to the furnace room to get a drink of water. There is a sink in the furnace room with a shelf containing glasses. LT gets a glass to drink from. The lights are dim. There is a musty smell. [ 107 ] The priest DeJaeger suddenly appears in the room. He locks the door behind him. He takes off LT’s pants and fondles his penis. LT is eventually turned around and bent over a table. Something wet is applied to his rectum like a cream. LT then experiences a lot of pain in his anus.

It feels like “a warm balloon was suddenly inflated inside his ass”. LT is unable to say how long this event takes. He was trying to think of other things like a stream or running water to get through the experience. At the time LT did not know what was happening to him. [ 108 ] When LT gets home he is still in pain. He goes to the toilet. LT discharges some blood and a milk-like fluid with his bowel movement. [ 109 ] LT then tries to tell his grandfather what happened at the Mission. His grandfather gets angry at him. LT is slapped hard on his right ear. His grandfather does not believe him.

LT is told that a man of God does not do this to people. LT would keep his silence for many years as a result of this treatment. [ 110 ] The defendant was convicted of this offence following a trial. U. Count 75 MT s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 111 ] MT is in a small office on the main floor of the Mission. The priest DeJaeger is seated in a chair and reading a children’s book to a

number of children who are present. MT and two friends are standing close to the priest as he reads from the book. At some point, the priest reaches over and put his hand on MT’s right buttock and tries to pull MT closer to where Mr. DeJaeger was seated. MT tries to pull back because he is uncomfortable. He is held fast by the priest and is unable to do so. The priest maintains his hold on MT’s bum for some minutes before releasing him. MT and his friends then leave the office area to play games in a larger room with his friends.

MT was between 8 and 12 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 112 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence, but then disputed the factual allegations underlying the allegation. A hearing was necessary to determine the facts. The victim had to give evidence in the course of this hearing. V. Count 76 TU s. 156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 113 ] TU is in the Mission with a younger brother and one other individual. All three youth are in the kitchen on the main floor. [ 114 ] The priest DeJaeger is serving the boys tea when he proposes to teach TU some self-defense moves.

TU is asked to lunge at the priest. TU does so twice and the priest blocks these moves. As TU moves against the priest a third time, Mr. DeJaeger suddenly grabs TU and turns the move into a dance. This involves the priest grabbing one of TU hands with one hand while the priest’s other hand rubs TU’s buttocks. This touching went on for an estimated 15 seconds. [ 115 ] TU breaks off this contact and returns to the table where his brother is seated. TU is upset. He tells his brother what had just happened and indicates that he wants to leave. The three youth then leave the Mission.

On returning home, TU tells his grandmother what happened. He is told that he should never return to the Mission again without adult supervision. [ 116 ] TU was between 14 and 18 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 117 ] The defendant entered a guilty plea to this offence, but disputed the factual allegations underlying the allegation. A hearing was necessary to sort out the facts. The victim had to testify about the allegation that is the subject of this charge. W.

Count 1 TA s.156 CCC (indecent assault/male) [ 118 ] TA is playing outside the Mission with some friends when he sees the priest DeJaeger’s dog. He is fascinated by this animal and he goes inside the Mission to get a better look. The priest is there. [ 119 ] There is a piano or organ inside. The children take turns playing on this. The priest is sitting at the organ when he asks TA if he would like to learn. TA says yes and gets on the priest’s lap. As he starts to play with the keys, Mr. DeJaeger fondles TA’s crotch area over top of his clothing. This makes TA very uncomfortable and he starts to squirm.

The priest then moves his leg to bounce TA up and down. TA starts to get an erection. He is asked by the priest what is wrong. The priest tries to move his hand inside TA’s pants. TA starts to struggle. TA then blacks out. His next memory is being on the floor playing with marbles. He has no memory of getting off the priest’s lap. He has no memory of starting to play with the marbles. TA attributes this blackout to fear. [ 120 ] TA was between 10 and 14 years of age when this incident occurred. [ 121 ] The defendant was convicted after trial on this offence. III.

VICTIM IMPACT – CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT [ 122 ] A child’s immaturity and lack of sophistication leaves the child very vulnerable to exploitation by others, particularly adults. The limited strength, size, and physical endurance of the child limits the child’s ability to defend against sexual abuse. The child is easy to

overwhelm physically. The child is easy to overwhelm emotionally. The younger and smaller the child, the more vulnerable he or she becomes. The moral culpability of an adult who exploits this vulnerability for reasons of personal sexual gratification is extremely high. [ 123 ] Adolescents are emotionally fragile. For a child victim of sexual abuse, the potential range of impacts can be as broad as they can be severe. The child’s sense of self respect, their ability to trust and bond with others, and their sexual identity are all things that are easily damaged.

As the sexual violence increases in severity, or where sexual victimization is prolonged or repeated, the psychological damage associated with this form of violence is likely to be enhanced. Sexual violence to an adolescent can be expected to leave a trail of damage and destruction in its wake. This damage can last a lifetime. [ 124 ] This psychological harm may manifest itself in depression and self-destructive behaviour later in life. It may fuel substance abuse and addiction as the child turns to alcohol and drugs in an effort to dull the pain.

This damage may generate intense anger and interpersonal conflict with others. With loss of self-respect, there is an enhanced risk of suicide and self-harm. [ 125 ] Mistrust of others is usually an enduring legacy of child sexual abuse. Once lost, a child’s trust in adults will be difficult to recover. This mistrust may cause the child to withdraw socially from those around them, particularly other adults. The victim’s ability to form meaningful intimate relationships with others later in life may be compromised.

A close relationship may become much more difficult to achieve. [ 126 ] Where sexual abuse is perpetrated by a person in authority, the child victim may grow up to distrust and fear all forms of authority. This may have significant repercussions on such a victim later in life. Sexual abuse may even cause collateral damage to the child victim’s own familial relationships.

This is so, particularly, in circumstances where a parent chooses to disbelieve a child’s disclosure and punishes the child victim for telling “lies”. [ 127 ] The child’s limited communication skills and comprehension may limit the therapeutic intervention that is available to undo the harm caused by sexual abuse. Psychotherapy and other forms of counselling will become increasingly less effective as the age and sophistication of the victim decreases.

The very young may not be positioned to participate in this process due to their limited comprehension and communication skills. [ 128 ] Remedial processes to assist victims are further complicated for unilingual Inuk children who must participate in the process through an interpreter. The expertise necessary to address sexual victimization of very young Inuit is not available in Inuktitut. [ 129 ] Many of Nunavut’s remote arctic communities lack the therapeutic expertise needed to address the special needs of the child victim of sexual abuse.

Effective therapeutic intervention will likely require removal of the child to a distant centre at prodigious public expense. The victim’s life and the life of the victim’s immediate family will be disrupted by this. The remedial processes may themselves become a source of stress and additional trauma for the young. IV. CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT – SENTENCING PRINCIPLES [ 130 ] Growing recognition of the tragic human consequences associated with this type of crime has caused a shift in sentencing jurisprudence over the last two decades.

This jurisprudence now requires the Court to put special emphasis upon the sentencing principles of denunciation and deterrence when addressing sexual offences against children. This approach was established in common law jurisprudence long before Parliament chose to codify this principle by enacting

section 718.01 of the Canadian Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46 [ Criminal Code ], in 2005. [ 131 ] While rehabilitation remains an important goal of sentencing in this case, as in any other, deterrence and denunciation must remain the primary or paramount consideration of the sentencing court.

This is necessary to properly reflect both the vulnerability of this class of victim and the very real potential for such offences to cause significant psychological harm to the young. [ 132 ] The high moral blameworthiness associated with this type of offence lies in an offender’s willful assumption of the risk of causing such harm. This moral culpability does not turn on whether harm is actually caused or not. Where actual harm is established, it is a seriously aggravating feature.

The absence of harm cannot reduce the offender’s moral blameworthiness because the risk of causing harm to a child by these offences is always present.

[ 133 ] Denunciation is necessary to preserve and protect the fundamental social values that are infringed by this type of criminal behaviour. This is so, particularly in circumstances where an offence is committed in circumstances amounting to a breach of trust or an abuse of power by persons in positions of authority. [ 134 ] Children need the law’s protection. The child or adolescent lacks both the physical means and the sophistication needed to adequately protect themselves from predatory adults.

A deterrent sentence becomes necessary to protect a vulnerable class of victims from those who are prepared to risk harming others in order to satiate their own selfish sexual desires. This protection is to be achieved, at least in part, through the imposition of exemplary sentences that deter other like-minded individuals from pursuing this same course of action. V. ANALYSIS A. Aggravating offence characteristics [ 135 ] All offences before the Court involve elements that include both breaches of trust and abuse of a position of authority. Contact with the victims arises as a result of Mr.

DeJaeger’s status as a priest. The children and adolescents were in this priest’s pastoral care. He owed a duty to his young parishioners, their parents, and the Church to protect and nurture the young in his care. [ 136 ] The priest held a position of authority within his parish. There are many instances of the priest controlling the movement and the activities of his young charges within the Mission. This authority was derived from Mr. DeJaeger’s status as a priest. Children are thus directed to go to various locations within the Mission on various errands.

Some children are engaged in clean up within the Mission under the supervision and direction of the priest. Others are asked to retrieve items for the priest upstairs. Many young children are asked to sit in the priest’s lap. Some children are tasked to assist Mr. DeJaeger with the care of his dog. There is very little evidence to suggest that the children resisted the priest’s direction or control. The childrens ready compliance with the priest’s directions relate to the priest’s status as head of the Roman Catholic Mission in Igloolik. [ 137 ] The instances of adult victimization also relate to Mr.

DeJaeger’s status as a priest. One young adult is victimized as she says prayers during the administration of the sacrament of confession by the priest. Another goes to see a visiting priest in Pelly Bay and is sexually assaulted inside the priest’s residence. [ 138 ] The breach of trust and abuse of authority by Mr. DeJaeger propel these various offences to a very high level of moral culpability. [ 139 ] It cannot be said that these many offences are simply opportunistic. There is some evidence of planning and design. There is some evidence of grooming.

Offers of food or drink were made from time to time to disadvantaged children. There is some evidence to suggest that the priest participated in child-like games like hide and seek. Arrangements were made by the priest with the parents of adolescents for sleepovers. It strains credulity to believe that these circumstances were not designed to facilitate access to young children. It was these circumstances that set the stage for the priest to victimize his young charges.

Two of the rapes occur in the Mission’s attic where a makeshift bed was prepared in advance to facilitate these offences. [ 140 ] There is some evidence on individual counts to suggest that threats of violence or other acts of gratuitous violence were made to either compel compliance or ensure the silence of the victims. When present, this type of behaviour aggravates the seriousness of the underlying sexual offence. [ 141 ] In many instances, threats were not necessary to convince the victims to hold their silence. The priest’s moral and religious authority was usually sufficient to attain this end.

There is evidence to suggest that the priest was well aware that his status as a priest would lead his parishioners to disbelieve allegations of abuse. A number of young victims were told that no one would believe them if they spoke of the incidents involving this priest because he was “God’s helper”.

In these circumstances, evidence of the offender urging secrecy upon his young victims is in itself an aggravating factor (see for example R v BSM, 2011 ABCA 105 , [2011] AJ No 372 (QL) , paragraph 13 and the authority referenced therein). [ 142 ] The offences continued to be committed by the defendant until he was charged in the nineties. He did not stop until authorities intervened.

[ 143 ] As the age of the victims’ decreases and the potential for psychological harm increases, the seriousness of the offence is elevated. Many of the victims have sustained serious psychological harm as identified in the Victim Impact Statements filed in this proceeding. The seriousness of a sexual offence is elevated where there is evidence of psychological harm. [ 144 ] There is no evidence to suggest that any of these offences were committed when Mr. DeJaeger’s judgment was impaired by alcohol or drugs. Mr. DeJaeger was sober throughout. [ 145 ] Mr.

DeJaeger has a criminal record for similar offences that date from his tenure as a priest in Baker Lake. On April 5, 1990, Mr. DeJaeger entered guilty pleas to eight counts of sexual assault and one count of indecent assault. These offences also involved adolescents. He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 5 years. On June 14, 1991, Mr. DeJaeger entered guilty pleas to a further two counts of sexual assault. He was then sentenced to terms of eight months and three months of custody to be served concurrently with the earlier sentence.

This criminal record was thus acquired subsequent to this priest’s departure from Igloolik. [ 146 ] The thirty-two offences now proceeding to sentence are the first offences in time for this offender. There is no evidence of any offences being committed by this offender subsequent to his release from prison. [ 147 ] The Crown urges the Court to consider the multiplicity of offences as an aggravating factor calling for an enhanced penalty.

There is support in the jurisprudence for this argument, but only in circumstances where a single count references multiple instances of misconduct over the period of time covered by the count in question. [ 148 ] In Mr. DeJaeger’s case, the Crown has chosen to lay individual charges to cover each and every act of sexual misconduct. If a penalty is assigned for each individual count, the Court cannot impose any additional punishment. The other counts will receive their own penalty.

If the penalty for these individual offences is elevated to reflect a multiplicity of offences, the resulting sentence would offend the rule against double punishment. [ 149 ] The Court consequently assigns no weight to this factor. Punishment will be meted out on the basis of the individual counts and the individual counts alone. B. Mitigating offence characteristics [ 150 ] The Court is unable to identify any mitigating factors related to these offences. [ 151 ] There is no credible evidence to suggest that Mr.

DeJaeger was acting under some kind of error of law or honest belief that was capable of rendering the conduct complained of legally innocent. This priest knew at all material times that his behaviour was morally wrong and contrary to the laws of both man and God. C. Mitigating factors related to the offender [ 152 ] The Defence argues that Mr. DeJaeger’s good behaviour since his release from prison on parole in March 1992, should be taken into account in his favour.

It is said that this good behaviour over the intervening 22 years speaks to his prospect for rehabilitation. [ 153 ] Little weight can be given to this submission. After completing his five year sentence of imprisonment on the Baker Lake charges, Mr. DeJaeger was charged with a number of sexual offences originating in Igloolik. He was released on bail to appear in court in Igloolik on June 13, 1995, to answer these new allegations. [ 154 ] Rather than face the new charges, Mr. DeJaeger skipped his bail and fled the country.

He remained unlawfully at large in Belgium until he was returned to Canada in January 19, 2011. This followed his expulsion from Belgium by the Belgian authorities. Mr. DeJaeger

did not return to Canada voluntarily. [155] Good behaviour subsequent to the commission of a crime can certainly be a mitigating factor, but only in the absence of evasivetactics on the part of an accused. Little or no weight should attach to intervening rehabilitation while an accused is unlawfully at large.To do otherwise would be to reward an accused for jumping bail or evading apprehension (see R v Miller and Couvreur (1972), (MB CA), 8 CCC (2d) 97 Man CA, [1972] MJ No 142 (QL); and R v Thompson, 1989 ABCA 212, (1989) 50 CCC (3d)126 Alta CA). [156] The argument made in favour of crediting Mr.

DeJaeger for his good behaviour ignores the fact that the offender created thisperiod of “good behaviour” by evading his legal and moral obligation to the Court. [157] The Defence urges this Court to temper justice with mercy by taking into account Mr. DeJaeger’s age and fragile medicalcondition. Mr. DeJaeger is now 67 years of age and has developed, or is developing, a number of age related medical concerns. [158] While the Court does give Mr.

DeJaeger’s present age some consideration in its later application of the totality principle,significant weight cannot be assigned to this circumstance in mitigation of sentence. Once again, this factor (old age) was created by Mr.DeJaeger himself as a direct result of his flight from justice and long self-imposed exile in Belgium. Had Mr. DeJaeger appeared asrequired in 1995 to answer the new criminal allegations, he would not have been in a position to raise his age and medical condition inmitigation of sentence. To give great weight to this submission in these circumstances would reward Mr.

DeJaeger for his attempt toevade justice. [159] There is nothing in evidence to suggest that harsh life experiences in Mr. DeJaeger’s formative years may have impaired his abilityto make sound judgments. He has received a higher education in a theological college and would have acquired the knowledge and soundanalytical skills that are expected of, and required by, a priest of the Oblate order. [160] The offences now before the Court for sentence were the first in time to be committed by Mr. DeJaeger.

A “first offender” isordinarily entitled to some credit in mitigation of sentence because they have never offended before and are of “good character” prior tothe commission of the offence for which they are to be sentenced. [161] It was this “good character” that resulted in Mr. DeJaeger being able to acquire his status of a priest. It was this “good character”that allowed Mr. DeJaeger to acquire the trust of his parishioners. It was this “good character” that enabled Mr. DeJaeger to facilitate andhide his predatory sexual activity while serving as a priest. Mr.

DeJaeger’s previous good character can be assigned little weight in thecircumstances presented here. D. Mitigating factors arising after the commission of the offences [162] Mr. DeJaeger did enter guilty pleas to eight of the less serious sexual offences. The facts underlying these pleas were very much indispute however. [163] A guilty plea is ordinarily given considerable weight by the court in mitigation of sentence.

This is done in large part to recognizethe great benefits associated with relieving complainants of their obligation to testify. [164] The trial process requires witnesses to relive their experiences in a public setting. Witnesses are subjected to close examination bylawyers. The reliability or credibility of their evidence is often challenged. Raw emotions are exposed by this. There is great anxiety,humiliation, and anger generated by this truth finding process.

Testifying in a trial environment can exacerbate old trauma and create newtrauma. [165] Trials are ordinarily avoided by an acceptance of responsibility. The benefits associated with seven of the guilty pleas were illusoryin this case. In all but one case, the complainants were required to testify about their experiences in order to resolve a factual disputerelated to the circumstances of the offence. Less weight in mitigation of sentence can be afforded Mr. DeJaeger as a consequence.

[ 166 ] The Defense did make a number of substantial admissions in an effort to expedite the trial. The defendant is entitled to some credit for having made these concessions. [ 167 ] The defendant was convicted after trial on twenty-four counts. Mr. DeJaeger is entitled to have the Crown prove the allegations made against him. Taking a matter to trial is not an aggravating factor.

But the substantial mitigating benefit associated with a guilty plea and avoidance of a trial cannot be applied in the absence of any formal acceptance of responsibility by an offender. [ 168 ] Remorse is a mitigating factor, but only where it is accompanied by some genuine acknowledgment of responsibility for a wrong that has been done. A claim of remorse rings hollow when made following a trial and immediately before the imposition of sentence. An expression of remorse is best made before, and not after, a victim is humiliated by a public trial. [ 169 ] Mr.

DeJaeger did participate in sex offender programming provided by Corrections Canada as a consequence of his sentence for the Baker Lake charges. The Court can consider this in its assessment of the likelihood of Mr. DeJaeger now reoffending. This programming was completed prior to Mr. DeJaeger’s precipitous departure from Canada in 1995. [ 170 ] The psychiatric assessments made while under sentence for the Baker Lake charges are now very dated. The offences before the Court for sentence were not part of these earlier assessments. Limited weight can be put on these dated psychiatric opinions for this reason. E.

Jurisdictional considerations [ 171 ] The prevalence of a particular type of crime is relevant to the need for emphasis on general deterrence as a sentencing principle. [ 172 ] The commission of sexual offences is a persistent and serious problem in all of Nunavut’s communities. Nunavut leads the country in the per capita rate of commission of this type of crime.

The information presented below is based on a review of the comparative information collected by Statistics Canada in their Incident-Based Crime Statistics. [ 173 ] Produced below are graphs that starkly demonstrate the alarming incidence of sexual violence generally and sexual violence against children in Nunavut that compare Nunavut’s crime rates to the rest of the country and the northern territories. (Supra, Footnote 1)

[ 174 ] The per capita rate of commission for sexual offences in Nunavut is running at a rate well above the national average . [ 175 ] Nunavut is also the leader in the incidence of sexual assaults reported and the number of individuals charged for sexual assaults among the northern territories. (Supra, Footnote 1) [ 176 ] Children are victimized in Nunavut at a much greater per capita rate in comparison to Canada as a whole.

(Supra, Footnote 1) [ 177 ] Again, Nunavut leads the northern territories in the incidence of sexual violation offences reported and the number of adults charged with such offences. (Supra, Footnote 1) [ 178 ] The high incidence of sexual offences generally and crimes against children in this jurisdiction requires a firm response by a sentencing court. The need to emphasize general deterrence through an exemplary sentence is enhanced under these circumstances. VI. COUNT BY COUNT ANALYSIS [ 179 ] The Court now examines all counts individually and assigns a sentence for each.

The determination of whether these individual counts should receive consecutive or concurrent terms of imprisonment will follow this analysis. This will be done when the Court applies the totality principle to the end result. A. Count 6 (JA) Indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC [ 180 ] The facts related to this offence are set out in paragraphs 10 & 11. This victim was a child between the ages of 8 and 12. The offence involves the removal of the child’s clothing, fondling of genitals, and the forced penetration of the child’s rectum with some unknown object. Considerable physical pain was caused to the child.

Gratuitous violence accompanied this indecent assault. The child was told not to talk about what happened and was forcefully slapped in the head. [ 181 ] This offence is punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment. The offender was convicted after trial. The moral culpability associated with this offence is very high. [ 182 ] A term of imprisonment of four years is appropriate for this offence being committed by this offender under these circumstances.

A(i). Count 5 (JA) unlawful confinement s.247 (2) CCC [ 183 ] The factual

summary for this offence is set out in paragraph 10 and 11. This offence involves physically taping the child victim to a bed in order to facilitate the commission of the sexual offence referenced in count 6. [ 184 ] Victim impact is referenced by Exhibit S-1. JA struggles with depression. She has difficulty controlling her anger. She finds that she is unable to open up and express her feelings. She is socially withdrawn. She has turned to alcohol and drugs to cope.

JA’s spouse and children frequently bear the brunt of her anger. [ 185 ] The statutory maximum penalty for this offence is a term of imprisonment for life. The offender was convicted of this offence after trial. [ 186 ] There is an extremely high degree of moral culpability attached to this offence. The likelihood of this offence causing psychological harm to a young victim is substantial. There is some evidence of psychological damage.

A separate sentence is called for this offence committed in these circumstances. [ 187 ] A sentence of three years imprisonment would ordinarily be appropriate for this offence committed by this offender in these circumstances. B. Count 10 (MA) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC [ 188 ] The factual

summary for this offence is outlined in paragraph 13 through 15. The offender was convicted after trial. The victim was between 8 and 12 when this offence occurred. The offence involves fondling of genitals under clothing. It consists of a single incident. The victim was told that he would lose his father if he talked about what happened. [ 189 ] Victim impact is referenced in Exhibit S-7. MA says that the incident has affected his spirituality. He no longer attends church. He has a hard time trusting others. This has impacted his marriage.

His jealousy and lack of trust in his spouse has caused a marriage breakdown. He is now separated from his spouse. There is some evidence of psychological harm. [ 190 ] A sentence of one year of imprisonment would ordinarily be appropriate for this offence committed by this offender in these circumstances. C. Count 12 (CA) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC [ 191 ] The factual

summary for this offence is set out in paragraphs 17 and 18. The victim was between the ages of 12 and 16 when this offence occurred. A guilty plea was entered, but the victim was required to testify. The offence involves a single incident of fondling on top of clothing. There are no threats of any kind to ensure the victim’s silence. [ 192 ] Victim impact is referenced in Exhibit S-6. No real details of impact are given by CA.

CA says that he has now put the incident behind him and moved on with his life. [ 193 ] A sentence of six months would ordinarily be appropriate for this offence committed by this offender in these circumstances. D. Count 13 (LA) Rape/Unlawful sexual intercourse s.144 CCC

[ 194 ] The factual

summary for this offence can be found at paragraphs 20 through to 25. The statutory maximum penalty for this offence is set at life imprisonment. The offender was convicted after a trial. [ 195 ] This victim was between 6 and 10 years of age when this offence occurred. This offence involved the removal of clothing, an order to play with Mr. DeJaeger’s genitals, and full vaginal intercourse. Much pain was inflicted on the victim. There was blood loss. The likelihood of psychological and physical harm to the victim was substantial.

The moral culpability associated with this offence is extremely high. [ 196 ] Victim impact is referenced by Exhibit S-3. LA dropped out of school at age 13 when she was in Grade six. She developed a serious problem with anger. Her family bore the brunt of this. To this day, she becomes very anxious when anyone, her children and husband included, try to grab at her arms and legs. This always reminds her of this incident with the priest. [ 197 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily call for a sentence of imprisonment of six years. E.

Count 18 (LKC) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC [ 198 ] The factual

summary for this offence is found at paragraphs 27 and 28. This victim was between the ages of 14 and 18 when this offence occurred. The offence involved a single incident of fondling the victim’s breasts and genitals over clothing during a game of hide and seek. There are no threats accompanying this incident. Mr. DeJaeger was convicted of this offence after trial. [ 199 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is a term of imprisonment of up to five years. [ 200 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of six months. E(i). Count 19 (LKC) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC [ 201 ] The factual

summary for this offence is found at paragraph 40. The victim was between the ages of 14 and 18 when this offence occurred. The offence involves a single incident of fondling the victim’s breast and genitals on top of her clothing following a prayer service. [ 202 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is 5 years of imprisonment. Mr. DeJaeger was convicted of this offence after trial. [ 203 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of six months. E(ii). Court file #07-13-95 Count 1 (LKC) Rape/Unlawful sexual intercourse s.144 CCC [ 204 ] The factual

summary for this offence is set out in paragraphs 30 to 33. The victim was between 14 and 18 years of age when this offence was committed. It involves the removal of the victims clothing in the attic area and full sexual intercourse. The makeshift bed in the attic was made in advance of this event. There is some evidence of planning and deliberation. There is blood loss. The victim is told to keep quiet about the incident - no one would believe her. [ 205 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is life imprisonment. Mr. DeJaeger was convicted of this offence after trial.

The likelihood of psychological harm flowing from this type of offence is very high. [ 206 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of six years.

E(iii). Court file# 07-13-95 Count 2 (LKC) Rape/Unlawful sexual intercourse s.144 CCC [ 207 ] The factual

summary for this offence is found at paragraphs 35 and 36. The victim was between the ages of 14 and 18 years of age when this offence occurred. The offence involves removal of clothing and

an act of full vaginal intercourse. The offence again occurs in the attic area on a makeshift bed. There is some evidence of planning and design. There is no evidence of any overt threats. [ 208 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is life imprisonment. Mr. DeJaeger was convicted of this offence after trial. The moral culpability associated with this offence is once again, very high as is the likelihood of psychological harm to the victim. [ 209 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of six years. E(iv). Court file#07-13-95 Count 3 (LKC) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC [ 210 ] The factual

summary for this offence can be found at paragraph 38. The victim was between the ages of 14 and 18 when this offence occurred. The offence involves forced masturbation of the offender. There is no evidence of threats being made to compel LKC’s silence. [ 211 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is five years. Mr. DeJaeger was convicted of this offence after trial. [ 212 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of 2 years. F. Count 24 (JI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC [ 213 ] The factual

summary for this offence is outlined at paragraphs 42 and 44. This victim was between 8 and 10 years of age when this offence was committed. The offence involved the removal of clothing, fondling of JI’s genitals, and attempted masturbation of JI by the offender. There was an attempt by the offender to compel JI to masturbate him. There is no evidence of threats being made to secure JI’s silence. [ 214 ] Victim impact is referenced by Exhibit S-15 that was written for these proceedings by the deceased’s common law spouse. Before JI passed away from cancer, he suffered from anger.

He developed a substance abuse problem. He was socially isolated and shunned public places. He avoided the church. [ 215 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is ten years of imprisonment. The offender entered a guilty plea to this offence. This victim is deceased and did not have to testify about this incident. [ 216 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of eighteen months. G. Count 26 (LI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC [ 217 ] The factual

summary for this offence may be found at paragraph 46. The victim was between the ages of 9 to 12 years of age. This offence involves a single incident of fondling LI’s genitals under clothing and the pinching of LI’s buttocks. There is no evidence of threats being made by the offender. [ 218 ] Victim impact on LI is referenced in Exhibit S-16. LI suffers from anger and depression. He has tried to take his own life on a

number of occasions. [ 219 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is ten years of imprisonment. A guilty plea was entered to this offence. The victim did have to testify to establish the facts upon which this plea was based. [ 220 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment for one year. H. Count 33 (PI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC [ 221 ] The factual

summary for this offence is set out in paragraphs 48 and 50. This victim was between the ages of 8 and 11 when this incident occurred. The offence consists of a single incident of fondling PI’s genitals on top of clothing. [ 222 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is a term of imprisonment of ten years. The offender entered a guilty plea to this offence. The victim did have to testify to establish the facts upon which this plea was based. [ 223 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of six months. H(i). Count 34 (PI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC [ 224 ] The factual

summary for this offence is found at paragraphs 51 and 52. This victim was between the ages of 8 and 11 years of age when this offence occurred. This offence consists of a single incident of fondling of PI’s genitals under clothing. There is no evidence of threats being made to win PI’s silence. [ 225 ] Victim impact is referenced in Exhibit S-14. PI distrusts all authority. His relationship with his mother was damaged when she refused to believe his disclosure of sexual abuse. PI started to rebel at home. From age 10 and onward, he developed a serious substance abuse problem.

This included the sniffing of gas and propane and both alcohol and drug dependence. PI says that he resorted to substance abuse in an effort to “numb the pain and shame”. PI avoids the church and refuses to permit his own child to be baptized. [ 226 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is a term of imprisonment of ten years. The offender was convicted after trial. [ 227 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of one year. I. Count 35 (DI) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC [ 228 ] The factual

summary for this offence may be found at paragraph 54 and 55. DI was between the ages of 10 and 12 when this offence occurred. The offence consists of a single incident of fondling DI’s genitals on top of her clothing. There is no evidence of threats being made by the defendant. [ 229 ] Victim impact is referenced in Exhibit S-5. DI suffered from recurrent depression. She was never happy and had a very low self- image following this event. She developed a drinking problem in her teens that stayed with her for 10 years. She attempted suicide during one of her drinking binges. She felt ashamed and dirty growing up.

DI would sometimes take showers in an effort to wash away this dirty feeling. [ 230 ] DI saw herself as a victim and had difficulty expressing her feelings. She was unable to trust other adult men. As a mother, she became very overprotective of her son when other men were present. DI is unable to trust persons in authority. She experienced difficulty in her domestic relationship because she found herself unwilling or unable to trust her spouse.

[ 231 ] The statutory maximum prescribed for this offence is a term of imprisonment of five years. The offender was convicted after trial for this offence. [ 232 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of six months. J. Count 36 (MI) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC [ 233 ] The factual

summary for this offence is found at paragraphs 57 through to 61. MI was between 6 and 10 years of age when this offence occurred. The offence consists of a single incident of the fondling of MI’s genitals under her clothing, but includes digital penetration of the victim’s vagina. Much pain and fear was caused by this activity. There is some bleeding. A threat to hit MI is used by the offender to secure MI’s silence. [ 234 ] Victim impact is referenced in Exhibit S-17. MI still fears Mr. DeJaeger. She never attends church. MI says her “heart is forever broken”.

This victim believes that it will never mend. [ 235 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is a term of imprisonment of up to five years. The offender was convicted of this offence after trial. [ 236 ] This offence committed by this offender would ordinarily merit a term of imprisonment of four years. K. Count 37 (RI) indecent assault on a male s.156 CCC [ 237 ] The factual

summary for this offence is found at paragraphs 63 to 65. RI was between the ages of 10 and 13 when this offence occurred. This offence consists of a single incident and includes partial removal of RI’s clothing, fondling of genitals, and attempted masturbation. RI was told by the offender that no one would believe him if he spoke of what happened because the offender was “God’s helper”. [ 238 ] Victim impact on RI is referenced in Exhibit S-18 and S-18a. RI continues to struggle with issues related to anger. He continues to suffer from sleep disturbances.

He no longer attends church because he has no trust in priests. [ 239 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is a term of imprisonment of up to ten years. A guilty plea was entered, but RI was required to testify to establish the facts underlying this offence. [ 240 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of incarceration of two years. L. Count 43 (LK) indecent assault on a female s.149 CCC [ 241 ] The factual

summary for this offence may be found at paragraphs 67 through to 71. LK was between the ages of 5 and 7 years of age when this offence occurs. This offence relates to a single incident of fondling of LK’s genitals under her clothing and digital penetration of the vagina. There is no evidence related to the use of threats to secure LK’s silence. [ 242 ] Victim impact is referenced in Exhibit S-12. The offence has caused LK to become socially withdrawn. She has difficulty expressing her feelings. She avoids other adult males (other than her husband).

[ 243 ] The statutory maximum for this offence is a term of imprisonment of up to five years. The offender was convicted of this offence following a trial. [ 244 ] This offence committed by this offender in these circumstances would ordinarily merit a term of incarceration of three years. M. Count 45 (ZN) sexual assault on a female s.246.1 CCC [ 245 ] The factual

summary for this off

[…]