r v. JAVAL RICK LIONEL, 2022 QCCQ 6450

R. c. Lionel 2022 QCCQ 6450 COUR OF QUEBEC (CRIMINAL DIVISION) CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTRÉAL N° : 500-01-201417-208 DATE : September 28, 2022 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE JUDGE ALEXANDRE ST-ONGE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ HIS MAJESTY THE KING Prosecutor v.

JAVAL RICK LIONEL Accused ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ AN ORDER HAS BEEN MADE PROHIBITING THE PUBLICATION OF ANY INFORMATION THAT COULD IDENTIFY THE VICTIM IN ANY MANNER. INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] The accused, Javal Rick Lionel, pleaded guilty to the indictable offence of non-consensual publication of an intimate image contrary to

section 162.1(1)

a) of the Criminal Code . [ 2 ] On November 17, 2019, he posted intimate images of S.B. (the victim), his ex-girlfriend, on a social media platform. Shortly thereafter, one of her friend recognized her (S.B.) and informed her of the situation. S.B. then advised her mother who immediately put on notice the accused to remove these images from the application. [ 3 ] Mr. Lionel complied. [ 4 ] S.B. was 18 years old at the time of the offence. Her Victim Impact Statement [1] (“ VIS ”) was filed during the sentencing hearing.

In it, she explains her fears and the anxiety she suffered, and that she had felt very uncomfortable in her own skin as a result of the accused’s conduct. [ 5 ] As for Mr. Lionel, he was 19 years old at the time. He does not have a criminal record and admitted his actions when confronted by the police officer investigating the victim’s complaint. [ 6 ] A Pre-Sentence Report (“ PSR ”) was ordered by the Court [2] . His author emphasises that the accused regrets his actions and now lives a stable life, after having gone through a difficult childhood where he had been physically and emotionally abused by his mother.

Also, Mr. Lionel does not have issues with either violence or sexual delinquency. Finally, the risk that he reoffends is low. [ 7 ] The evidence adduced during the sentencing hearing unequivocally supports the conclusion that the accused’s rehabilitation is (1) convincing and (2) in a very advance stage, if not complete. [ 8 ] The prosecution argues that the appropriate sentence is a suspended sentence and 2 years of probation with 200 hours of community service .

The main sentencing objective should be denunciation because of the “ revenge porn” societal phenomenon seen on social media platforms. [ 9 ] Considering the accused’s profile and the numerous mitigating circumstances, the defence suggests a conditional discharge and 2 years of probation with 200 hours of community service . [ 10 ] The parties recommendations are not that far apart. They both agree that a discharge is in the best interest of the accused. The only contested issue is whether or not a conditional discharge [3] would be contrary to the public interest. ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED

[ 11 ] Therefore, the only question I must answer is whether or not a conditional discharge is against the public interest. THE AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS [4] [ 12 ] Between April 2018 and January 2019, S.B. and the accused were in a romantic relationship that begun when they were both 17 years old, and ended 8-9 months later. [ 13 ] It was the accused first romantic relationship and following the breakup, he experienced suicidal thoughts. [ 14 ] Two months after the pair had broken up, while he was in a bar, Lionel saw the victim with another man and became jealous.

This event prompted S.B. to block him from her social networks. [ 15 ] On November 17, 2019, the victim receives a text message from an acquaintance, Ms. T., telling her that she had just seen 3 photos and videos of her naked on Snapchat . At the time, she was 18 years and 7 months old while Lionel was 19 years old. [ 16 ] The videos/photos were posted by the accused on a small private group on the application. They were captured through a reflection in a mirror, and were of poor quality, as the faces were not visible. In one of the photos, S.B. is wearing panties and her breasts are covered by Mr.

Lionel’s arms. [ 17 ] According to the Agreed Statement of Facts , the evidence submitted by the victim shows: • Two videos in which she is seen lying on the bed by the reflection of a mirror without any clothes on, or in her underwear (unclear [5] ) . The faces are not visible and the video lasts 5 seconds; • Two screenshots, one in which she is wearing panties, and the other one in which her breasts are visible; [ 18 ] The same day, the victim’s mother immediately contacts Mr. Lionel and tells him to remove the videos, or she would call the police. The accused complies and removes the intimate material.

The accused is later met on January 13, 2020 by a police investigator. He then admits all the relevant facts, and also mentions that he had made a mistake, that he had deleted all the videos on his cell phone, and that he had been the only one in possession of the intimate material. EVIDENCE ADDUCED DURING THE SENTENCING HEARING A. The Victim Impact Statement [6] (VIS) [ 19 ] In it, S.B. mentioned that she felt anxiety, anger, fear, shame and embarrassment, after she had learned about the content of the material posted by the accused.

It was like as “ if everyone saw the images ” and she was under the impression that everyone was talking about her when she would walk down the hall at her school. [ 20 ] She had the benefit of “a huge support system that allowed her to get through these tough times”. As years went on, she feels that she is becoming herself again. [ 21 ] Finally, she felt uncomfortable in her own skin, and truly feels she deserves an apology. B. The Pre-Sentence Report [7] (PSR) [ 22 ] The author mentions that Lionel had been repeatedly abused by his mother during his childhood.

As a result, his custody had been awarded to his older sister after an investigation by Youth Protection Services . [ 23 ] Mr. Lionel accepts his responsibility for the offence and does not minimize his implication. His regrets are sincere and he demonstrates empathy toward the victim. [ 24 ] His behavior originated from his immaturity and his desire for revenge against his ex-girlfriend. His criminality is attributed to a lack of judgment as Mr. Lionel does not have issues with violence or sexual delinquency.

Emotional deprivation in his childhood, arising from the psychological and physical violence he had suffered, reduced his ability to develop his self-esteem. Motive for the accused’s action relates to an inappropriate response to his own frustration rather than a desire to hurt his victim. [ 25 ] According to the PSR , his arrest and the following judicial process have had a dissuasive impact. Also, the risk that he reoffends is low. Finally, his current romantic relationship is stable and his social network is positive and supports him through the present procedures. C. The testimony of Mr.

Lionel and his letter [8] of excuse [ 26 ] The accused testified during the sentencing hearing. His apologies are sincere and he acknowledges the huge impact his conduct has had on the victim. Mr. Lionel also demonstrated his introspection when he answered questions put to him by the prosecutor concerning why he had committed the offence: his answers were truthful and very convincing.

[ 27 ] Mr. Lionel also completed 10 sessions of anger management therapy. [ 28 ] He works on a full time basis as an administrative agent for the C.I.S.S.S. of the Monteregie region, earning $21.89 / hour. He had to submit to a criminal background check to get hired. [ 29 ] Finally, Mr. Lionel agrees to be followed by a probation officer. D. Letters regarding the character of the accused [9] [ 30 ] The defence produced three letters of reference to attest the good character of the accused. They were written by

(1) Wendell Joseph (a friend), (2) his romantic partner (Chloe Rossignol) and (3) the latter’s mother (Kelly Kennedy). These letters, combined with all the evidence in the case, demonstrate his good character and his rehabilitation.

ANALYSIS Gravity of the offence of non-consensual publication of an intimate image [ 31 ] The gravity of the offence refers to the seriousness of the offence in a generic sense as reflected by the potential penalty imposed and any specific features of the commission of the crime which tend to increase the harm to the community occasioned by the offence [10] . [ 32 ] This offence is punishable by a maximum term of incarceration of 5 years and there is no minimum sentence scheduled for this offence. It is a different offence than sexual assault as the essential elements of the offences are different.

The maximum sentence that could be imposed is also lower (5 years vs 10 years for sexual assault). [ 33 ] However, the offence of non-consensual publication of an intimate image often shares a certain element of control (or attempt of) by the offender over the victim that is present in many sexual offences cases or in domestic violence cases. In addition, the consequences on the victim, for of all these offences, are frequently described in the case law as serious and long lasting [11] . [ 34 ]

Section 162.1 of the Criminal Code criminalizes a broad range of conduct as explained in the decision in R. v. A.C . [12] : [19] The provision captures a broad range of conduct that may constitute sharing. For example, it criminalizes the sending of a single image of an unidentifiable person by text message to a single recipient. It also prohibits sharing an image using a social media application with a limited audience capable of viewing the sharer’s account.

Finally, as in this case, it includes non-consensual uploading of photos and videos through a more generally accessible medium such as a website. [ 35 ] As a result, the courts have imposed a variety of sentences, ranging from conditional discharges to firm prison terms [13] .

The following elements have been found relevant regarding the gravity of the offence: • The nature of the images shared, posted or published (for example, their humiliating, sexual and/or explicit nature, or their level of intimacy); • The number of intimate images posted, for how many times and over what period of time; • The good or bad quality of the intimate images, and to what extent the victim is recognizable in these; • The scope of the potential audience who had, or could have had, access to the images; • Has the victim been recognized? • The relationship between the audience who had access to the images and the victim; • Have the images been deleted?

When? In what context? Who had been in possession of the intimate images (past and present)? • Are the images still out there on the Internet or on any social media platform? [ 36 ] In the case at bar, the intimate images were posted once, on a small private group on the Snapchat application. They were captured through a reflection in a mirror and were of poor quality, as the faces were not visible. [ 37 ] The victim had been recognized by one of her friend, Ms. T..

According to the Agreed Statement of Facts [14] , the evidence submitted by the victim shows: • Two videos in which she is seen lying on the bed by the reflection of a mirror without any clothes on, or in her underwear (unclear [15] ) . The faces are not visible and the video lasts 5 seconds; • Two screenshots, one in which she is wearing panties, and one in which her breasts are visible; [ 38 ] The accused immediately removed the material from the application and later deleted the videos and photos. He had been the only one in possession of the intimate material and the evidence tends to show that only Ms.

T. recognized the victim.

[ 39 ] After considering all the evidence before me, I am of the opinion that the gravity of the offence is at a lower level on the gravity scale. General principles of sentencing [ 40 ] The sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender [16] . I shall take into consideration the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, notably the ones expressly mentioned in the Criminal Code [17] . [ 41 ] Also, I must consider sentences imposed on similar offenders for a similar offence committed in similar circumstances [18] .

Sentencing is not, however, a mathematical formula, but rather a delicate exercise of ponderation of the mitigating and aggravating circumstances and the sentencing objectives that should be emphasized.

Aggravating circumstances [ 42 ] The following aggravating circumstances are present in the case at bar: • The consequences suffered by the victim [19] are important: anxiety, anger, fear, shame, not feeling comfortable in her own skin and embarrassment; • The fact that the victim had been the accused’s intimate partner [20] ; • The young age (S.B. was 18 years and seven months old) [21] of the victim when the accused committed the offence to which he pleaded guilty. I consider the victim’s young age as an aggravating circumstance even if she was an adult at the material time, having just turned 18 years old.

Mitigating circumstances [ 43 ] The mitigating circumstances are numerous. I consider : • The plea of guilt. I give a lot of weight to this circumstance, when considered with the evidence as a whole, as it not only reflects the accused’s remorse but also saves the victim from the impact of testifying in Court during the trial (determination of guilt phase); • The absence of a criminal record; • The accused’s young age (19 old at the time of the offence). I give a lot of weight to this mitigating circumstance.

In his law treaty Sentencin g, Clayton Ruby mentions: “ Youth is generally conceded to be a mitigating factor, probably because it discloses the greatest possibilities for reform and because we do not expect so much from youthful judgment. […] [22] Thus, the general rule for most offences is that a sentence should not be imposed on a youthful offender for the purpose of general deterrence, but should rather be directed at rehabilitation .” [23] • The accused sincere regrets and apologies; • The fact that the accused immediately removed the intimates images on the social media application after being told to do so by the victim’s mother; • The fact that the accused had delated the intimates images on his cell phone; • The admissions made by Mr.

Lionel when confronted by the police investigator; • The anger management therapy; • The extremely positive PSR. I give a lot of weight to this report who enumerates multiple mitigating circumstances : 1. The low risk of reoffending; 2. Mr. Lionel does not have issues with violence or sexual delinquency; 3. Mr. Lionel accepts his responsibility and does not minimize his implication; 4. He demonstrates empathy toward the victim; 5. Motive for the accused’s actions relates to an inappropriate response to his own frustrations rather than a desire to hurt his victim; 6.

Emotional deprivation in his childhood, arising from the abuse he had suffered, reduced his ability to develop his self-esteem; 7. His arrest and the judicial process have had a dissuasive impact on Mr. Lionel; 8. His current romantic relationship is stable and his social network is positive and supports him through the present procedures. • The overwhelming evidence pointing to Mr. Lionel’s rehabilitation (anger management sessions, introspection, sincere apologies,

education, work ethics, stable relationship, and respect of his bail conditions); • Finally, the accused’s post-offence conduct (almost 34 months) demonstrates his good character.

Purpose and principles of sentencing [ 44 ] While notable intrinsic differences exist between physical abuse, criminal harassment and the offence of non-consensual publication of intimate images, I am of the opinion that for sentencing purpose, the fact that the accused posted intimate images of his ex-girlfriend after the break-up should be considered as a domestic violence case. [ 45 ] On that subject, the Quebec Court of Appeal [24] could not be clearer: domestic violence is a scourge that must be eradicated. Sentencing in this matter pursues the imperatives of denunciation and deterrence [25] .

In Davidson [26] , the Court of Appeal mentions: Moreover, the Court has emphasized on several occasions the added weight that must be given to the objectives of denunciation and deterrence in the context of domestic violence. Indeed, sentencing in these matters pursues two main imperatives: to denounce the unacceptable and criminal character of domestic violence and to enhance the confidence of the victims and the public in the administration of justice. [ 46 ] However, I cannot exclude other sentencing objectives from my analysis [27] , since Mr.

Lionel is young, of good character and the evidence concerning his rehabilitation is overwhelming. I must balance these objectives (denunciation, deterrence and rehabilitation) to impose an appropriate sentence [28] . Finally, conditional discharges have been imposed on certain occasions by the courts for first time offenders for the offence of non-consensual publication of an intimate image [29] .

Range of sentences [ 47 ] The analysis of the reported case law [30] in Canada regarding the offence of non-consensual publication of intimate images indicates that the range of sentences (at large) varies from a conditional discharge to a prison term of 18 months. [ 48 ] Regarding offenders who, like the accused, pleaded guilty, had no or few past convictions, showed remorse and had a good prospect of rehabilitation, the range of sentences fluctuates from a conditional discharge to 90 days of incarceration .

As for the latter sentences (incarceration), they are imposed mainly in cases where the images posted are either very intimate, sexual in nature, or have been (or could potentially be) viewed by a large audience.

Discharge provisions in the Criminal Code [ 49 ] The Criminal Code [31] stipulates four conditions for an accused to be discharged: (1) no minimum punishment prescribed by law, (2) the offence is not punishable by an imprisonment of 14 years or for life, (3) the discharge is in the best interest of the offender, (4) and not contrary to the public interest. [ 50 ] In the present case, the first two conditions are met since there is no minimum punishment prescribed by law and the maximum sentence is a prison term of 5 years. [ 51 ] In Harbour [32] , the Quebec Court of Appeal mentions that the discharge provisions are not confined to exceptional cases and can even be an adequate sentencing option when the crime involved is considered a scourge. [33] The gravity of the offence does not per se prevent the granting of a discharge even when the commission of the offence is widespread [34] . [ 52 ] Therefore, when the conditions mentioned in

section 730 are present, the discharge provisions should not be excluded beforehand, even in cases involving domestic violence [35] . In these matters, where the objectives of denunciation and deterrence have precedence [36] , a special attention should be paid to the intrinsic gravity of the offence and the accused’s rehabilitation efforts [37] .

The consequences of a discharge (absolute discharge or conditional) [ 53 ] Firstly, while the offender discharged, absolutely or not, is deemed not to have been convicted [38] , he is not considered “ not guilty ” of the offence, and as such, he would have to answer positively to a question asking him if he has ever been found guilty of a criminal offence. [ 54 ] Secondly, section 730(4) of the Criminal Code provides a mechanism for the judge who imposes a conditional discharge to (1) cancel the discharge in the event of a breach of the conditions in the probation order that accompanies the conditional discharge and (2) impose another sentence for the original infraction , in addition to any other sentence for the offence of breach of probation. [ 55 ] Thirdly, according to authors Hugues Parent and Julie Desrosiers, a conditional discharge, particularly when community service is ordered, compared to an absolute one, includes a punitive and deterrent element [39] , in addition to the one regarding the acknowledgment of the harm done to the victim. [ 56 ] Finally, the period where the RCMP, or any department or agency of the Government of Canada, can disclose the existence of a record for a discharge is different in the case of a conditional one (3 years [40] ) and an absolute one (1 year [41] ).

Public interest and the discharge [ 57 ] When analyzing the question of the public interest, I must consider the general deterrence, the seriousness of the offence, its incidence in the community, the public perception and its confidence in the administration of justice [42] .

[ 58 ] I must also be sensitive to the reaction of an informed member of the public [43] .

This sensibility should not, however, prohibit me from rendering a sentence that is otherwise appropriate [44] . [ 59 ] Finally, in my analysis, I must remember that the terms “not contrary to the public interest” ( the right test ) have a different meaning that the ones “ in the best interests of the community” ( the wrong test ) as explained by Clayton Ruby in Sentencing: “The court must consider whether or not a discharge would be contrary to the public interest, and it is not sufficient to ask whether a discharge would be in the best interests of the community.

There is a significant difference between asking whether a discharge is in the “public interest” (the wrong test) and asking whether it would be “not contrary to the public interest” (the right test). The latter simply means that a discharge would not be deleterious.

To ask the former is to make an error in principle” . [45] (References omitted) Sentencing objectives applied [ 60 ] In the case at bar, considering the multiple mitigating circumstances [46] , the fact that the victim is the accused’s ex-partner, and all the evidence, I am of the opinion that the objectives of denunciation, deterrence and rehabilitation should all be applied. Is a conditional discharge in the best interest of the accused? [ 61 ] The evidence adduced regarding the accused’s job, the background check done and his very young age [47] convince me that a discharge is in his best interest.

The prosecution also concedes it is the case. Is a conditional discharge contrary to the public interest? [ 62 ] A conditional discharge is not contrary to the public interest for the following reasons: • The accused immediately removed the intimate images on the social media application upon being told to do so by the victim’s mother and ultimately erased the intimates images; • The young age (19 years old at the material time) of the accused and the overwhelming evidence pointing to his rehabilitation; • The risk of reoffending is low and Mr. Lionel does not have issues with violence or sexual delinquency.

Motive for his actions relates to an inappropriate response to his own frustrations rather than a desire to hurt his victim; • Mr. Lionel accepts his responsibility, does not minimize his implication and demonstrates empathy towards the victim; • The victim had a huge support system that allowed her to “get through those tough times” and she feels that she is becoming herself again. The proposed community service incorporates, as mentioned earlier, a punitive and deterrent element [48] ; [ 63 ] In

summary , a conditional discharge, combined with a probation for three years, and 200 hours of community service , is not contrary to the public interest in the circumstances of the present case. [ 64 ] Finally, this sentence is in line with conditional discharges imposed in the following cases [49] , in relatively similar circumstances, where the consequences of the crime also have had important consequences on the victims: • R . c. Robidas , 2020 QCCQ 942 • R . c. Carrillo Villagran , 2019 QCCQ 1732 • R . c. Gallegos , 2022 QCCQ 382 • R . c. A.B., 2020 QCCQ 311 • R . v. A.C. , 2017 ONCJ 129 FOR THESE REASONS, THE APPROPRIATE SENTENCE IS: • A CONDITIONAL DISCHARGE

____________________________ ALEXANDRE ST-ONGE, J.C.Q.

Me Thierry Sabourin DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS For the Prosecutor Me Fabrice Poirier Legal Aid office of Montreal For the accused Date of the sentencing hearing : July 11, 2022 • A PROBATION OF THREE YEARS WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS : o Keep the peace and be of good behavior; o Appear before the court when required to do so; and o Notify the court or the probation officer in advance of any change of name or address, and notify the court or the probation officer of any change of employment or occupation; o Prohibition to communicate directly or indirectly with S.B.; o Prohibition to make any mention of S.B. on any social media site or application; o Prohibition to be in the physical presence of S.B.; o Prohibition to be within a radius of 200 meters from S.B.’s residence, place of studies or place of work; o Accomplish 200 hours of community service in the next 15 months; o Make an appointment with the probation office in the next 72 hours to register for the community service; o Meet his probation officer according to modalities set by him.

I AM IMPOSING THE SURFINE APPENDIX A (TABLE OF CASES) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence Conditional discharge

R. v. Agoston , 2017 ONSC 3425 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused received, without solicitation, 2 photographs from a young woman, one of her vagina and one of her nude. - The accused showed the pictures to two co- workers and then deleted them shortly after. - The face was not visible and no feature would identify the victim. - Guilty plea. - No prior conviction. - P.S.R. very favourable. - Sincere remorse. - No Victim Impact Statement filed. Conditional discharge 1 year probation R. v.

Brunner , 2020 ABPC 103 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - At a party, while the victim was sleeping, a photograph of her bare chest was taken by someone. - The accused came into possession of the photograph and transmitted it to a friend. - The photograph has been deleted from the devices and was not transmitted further. - Guilty plea. - Young age (23 years old). - No prior conviction. - Sincere remorse. - He now abstains from alcohol and drugs. - No Victim Impact Statement was filed. Conditional discharge 2 year probation with 100 hours of community service R. c.

Robidas 2020 QCCQ 942 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Voyeurism s. 162 - The accused and the victim dated for a period of one month. - The accused filmed one of their sexual intercourse without the victim's knowledge. - He distributed three short sequences, via the Snapchat app, to a group consisting of 22 members of his school football team. - Although the Snapchat application makes sure that after two openings, the file gets destroyed, one of the people in the group recorded the footage. - One of the sequence allows to see the buttocks of the victim and a penetration, without seeing the face. - All those who viewed these videos recognized the victim. - Guilty plea. - Young age (18 years old). - Sincere remorse and guilt for his behavior. - No prior conviction. - Impulsive and immature action. - The victim suffered stress and her confidence was greatly shaken.

Her trust in men and in herself was greatly diminished. The accused’s lack of judgment and respect affected the victim’s pride and dignity. Conditional discharge 2 year probation with 150 hours of community service Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R . c. Carrillo Villagran , 2019 QCCQ 1732 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim were co-workers. - The accused send intimate photograph of the victim to 7 co-workers, as well as an email purportedly signed by her with extremely vulgar language suggesting that she was sexually available to anyone who wanted it. - The accused reported himself, apologizing to the victim.

He lost his job. - He was heavily intoxicated when he sent the photos. - Guilty plea - No prior conviction. - Sincere remorse. - He undertook a therapy. - He now abstains from alcohol and go to AA meetings. - The victim had to change jobs. She suffered from many physical and psychological consequences from this event: insecurity, confusion, emotional instability, anxiety, anger, shame, increased use of alcohol, drugs and medication, and sleep disturbances. Conditional discharge 2 year probation with 200 hours of community service R. c.

Gallegos , 2022 QCCQ 382 - Publication of image s. 162.1 - The accused transmitted to a friend by internet eight photos and videos of his partner. - Guilty plea. - Sincere remorse. - Low risk of reoffending. - No prior conviction. - The victim suffered from anxiety, loss of confidence in herself and in others, and fear that the images transmitted would end up on the Internet. Conditional discharge 2 year probation with 240 hours of community service R . c.

A.B ., 2020 QCCQ 311 Permission to appeal the sentence dismissed, 2020 QCCA 1290 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Voyeurism s. 162 - The accused published five photos of his wife on an exchange site called "Newbienudes.com". - In one of the picture, the victim's face is clearly visible. - The pictures have been seen on the website between 247 and 601 times. - He also made three short videos of the victim in the shower without her knowledge, and then he extracted a photo of one the videos and shared it via text message with one of his friends. - The victim is not visible on the photo extracted from the video. - Guilty plea. - He undertook a therapy before knowing that the victim had filed a complaint. - Sincere remorse. - No prior conviction. - Very low risk of reoffending. - The victim stop working for 18 months, she felt betrayed, violated in her intimacy and her integrity.

Conditional discharge 2 year probation with 240 hours of community service Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. A.C ., 2017 ONCJ 129 * also under R. v.

Calpito - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Breach of conditions s. 145(3) - The accused and the victim were in a dating relationship for three years. - During the relationship, the victim sent the accused nude photos of herself and consented to have the accused take photos and videos of her naked. - He send through Instagram 7 nude pictures of the victim to several friends from her university and from her employer. - Guilty plea. - Young age (21 years old). - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - Took full responsibility for his actions. - The consequences on the victim’s life were very serious.

She lost her self- esteem, she feel horrified, embarrassed, disgusted and distrustful of people. She failed two university courses. Conditional discharge 3 year probation with 150 hours of community service Suspended sentence R. v. J.S. , 2019 ABPC 134 - Publication of an intimate image s. 162.1 - After having separated from his wife, the accused posted a nude photograph of her on a men’s chat group at his church.

The photograph was captioned “my wife is a liar and a cheater” and she was depicted in the photograph sitting naked on a bed in a sexually provocative position. - He did nothing to assist in removing the photograph and the pastor had to intervene to have it removed. - Guilty plea. - Prior conviction for mischief and failure to appear in court. - Sincere remorse. - Substancial harm to the victim. Suspended sentence 2 year probation R. v . Zhou , 2016 ONCJ 547 * also under R. v.

B.Z. - Criminal harassment s. 264 -The accused and the victim were romantically involved. - At the accused request, the victim took photos of herself and posted them on a private internet site that only the two of them could access, when she was 17 and he was 19. - The accused placed ten of these nude and semi- nude photos with her face visible on a pornography website to which the public had access. - The posting indicated that there had been 1,333 views and were online for two years. - Guilty plea. - Young age (19 years old when he committed the crime, 23 years old at the time of sentencing). - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - Participated in counselling. - The impact of this crime has been devastating for the victim.

She was unable to leave her room or attend class, engaging in self- destructive behaviour, and experienced growing feelings of darkness and emptiness. She became depressed, anxious, and terrified. Suspended sentence 1 year probation 4 days (6 days with enhanced credit) in pretrial custody Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v . P.S.D ., 2016 BCPC 400 - Publication of an intimate image s. 162.1 - Breach of conditions s. 145(3) - The accused and the victim, both in their early twenties, had been in a long term, “on again/off again” relationship. - While the victim was only partially clothed, and without her consent, the accused took pictures of her on his phone.

He then transmitted some of those pictures to two friends with instructions to save the pictures and with the intention at that time to cause her emotional harm. - The pictures included portions of the victim bare breasts. - They were of poor quality; they were quite blurry and it was difficult to recognize the victim. - Guilty plea after 2 days of trial for more serious charges. - Young age (22 years old). - No prior convictions. - Positive prospect for rehabilitation. Suspended sentence 2 year probation 60 days (90 days with enhanced credit) in pretrial custody Conditional sentence of detention R. c.

A.B. , 2020 QCCQ 260 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Breach of conditions s. 145(3) This judgment includes a sentencing chart. - The accused and the victim were involved in an extramarital affair. - During that relationship, they filmed themselves having consensual intercourse. - When the relationship deteriorated, the accused sent an acquaintance one of those video through a private message using the WhatsApp application. - It was a 50-second video, which showed the victim performing a sexual act, her breasts were exposed and her face was visible. - The acquaintance already had the video in question. - Guilty plea. - Not very favourable P.S.R. - The risk of reoffending remains present. - Relatively extensive criminal record. - No Victim Impact Statement was filed.

Conditional sentence Total 4 months (2 months for publication of image s. 162.1) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. J.E.C. , 2021 ABPC 58 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim were involved in an intimate relationship for about one years. - During that year, the accused uploaded 20 intimate images of the victim on a website called Fetlife.com. - Six of these depicted the victim engaged in sexual activities with the accused, and the rest were intimate photos. Her face is obscured and she is not otherwise identifiable in the photographs. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse: he wrote an apology letter to the victim. - The impact on the victim was significant.

Past trauma from sexual abuse resurfaced. Her ability to form relationships, and to trust, have been severely damaged. She is extremely self-conscious. She has turned to drugs and alcohol to try to cope. She has gone to therapy to find professional help in dealing with these challenges. Conditional sentence 4 months R. v.

Scarfe , 2021 NSSC 183 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Breaking and entering s. 348 - The accused and the victim were involved in an intimate relationship. - There were two incidents of breaking and entering into the complainant’s home, over a number of days. - The judgment does not provide information concerning the publication of intimate image offence. - Guilty plea. - The accused does not seem to appreciate the harm done by him sharing the images. - Minimal criminal history. Conditional sentence 4 months Suspended sentence for the breaking and entering R. v.

J.A.H ., 2021 SKQB 9 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim were involved in an intimate relationship for about two years. -After they broke up, the victim sent a photograph of her with another man. - The accused got upset and sent a total of 18 images to the victim and the victim’s parents, including 6 intimate photos of her. - Her face was visible in at least 2 of the pictures. - Her breasts were visible in four images, her vagina in one. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - Important impact on the victim.

She experienced fear, anxiety, and difficulty sleeping and eating. Her job performance and relationship with her four children were adversely affected. She fears the pictures will resurface again. Some 18 months after the offence, emotionally, mentally, and physically drained, she resigned from her position and her eldest daughter went to live with her grandmother. Conditional sentence 6 months Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. N.K.R.B. , 2020 BCPC 223 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim were married for many years. - The victim asked the accused to delete all her intimate pictures. He lied when he told her that he did. - After they got separated, the victim started a new relationship. - The accused sent to her new partner a picture of her performing an act of fellatio on the accused.

Her face was visible. - The accused was intoxicated and provoked by the victim’s new partner. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - He has been attending counselling. - Important impact on the victim. Her ability to participate fully in new intimate relationships has been adversely affected by this incident. She has missed a number of days of work as a result of the psychological trauma. Conditional sentence 6 months R. v.

J.B. , 2018 ONSC 4726 - Publication of image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim were in an intimate dating relationship for 6 months. - After they ended their relationship, the accused created a “fake” Facebook profile account, using the victim’s full name and a photograph. - The images already posted on the fake Facebook profile included photographs of her 9-year- old son, and five intimate images of her. - 96 persons from her close entourage had accepted “friend” requests and had access to the intimate images. - Guilty plea. - Many prior convictions. - The accused’s conduct was deliberate and calculated, and involved sustained planning and effort. - Important impact on the victim.

She now struggles with severe depression and insecurity, and she has lost trust in others. She has to live daily with the uncertainty of wondering whether those she lives, works and otherwise interacts with have seen the photos, and what they must think of her. Conditional sentence 16 months Intermittent prison sentence Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. N.N.,2019 ONCJ 512 - Publication ofintimate image s.162.1 - The accused and thevictim had been in arelationship forapproximately one and ahalf years.

The victimhad sent intimatephotographs and videos ofherself. - The accused added thesephotos and videos toSnapchat on February 27,2018, removed them, andthen posted them back on March 1st. - These were available tothe community at large. - The images that weredisplayed revealed herbreasts and buttocks. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - Young age (20 years old atthe time of the offence, 21 atthe sentencing). - The victim stated that shehad felt betrayed and hurtand had cried every nightsince it had happened.

Shestated that she had beenrecognized by multiplepersons, and she had hadbeen contacted by some. Intermittentprison 30 days R. v.

B.S.,2019 MBPC 26 - Publication ofintimate image s.162.1 - Criminalharassment s. 264 - The victim had beendating the accused forseveral months. - After she ended therelationship, he startedharassing her. -He sent intimate imagesof the victim to her father.They included a nudeimage, and two images ofher performing sexualacts, including a fellatio. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - He spent 57 days in anaddiction and mental health-counselling program. - He has been sober foreighteen months and haslearned how to respectwomen. - The private ForensicAssessment is favourable. - Important impact on thevictim.

She was unable tosleep or eat properly forweeks. Her relationship withher father was deeplystrained, it also affected herwork due to constant worryand anxiety. She fell into adepressive mode. This hasnegatively affected her self-esteem and her ability to trustothers. Intermittentprison 81 days (3 months for162.1 and 1month for 264. less 39 daysenhanced creditin pretrialcustody) R. v.

Borden, (NL PC) - Publication ofintimate image s.162.1 - When the accusedrelationship with herpartner ended, her formerpartner started a newrelationship with anotherwoman, the victim. - The accused came intopossession of a number ofnude and intimatephotographs of the victimand she posted thesephotographs online onPlenty of Fish andFacebook accounts. - Some of these showedthe victim engaging insexual activity. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - Mother of three children. - The victim has felthumiliated and embarrassed.Impact on her fifteen-year-old daughter.

She is worriedabout how many people hadseen the pictures. Intermittentprison 90 days Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v .

Newby , [2018] O.J. no. 6279 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Years after the accused and the victim had stop dating, the accused published a video and pictures of the victim on three websites in his efforts to show two acquaintances from her past images of her engaged in intimate sexual activity. - The images, 4 nude photos and a video depicted the victim performing oral sex. - These images will remain on the internet in perpetuity. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - Relatively young. - He has been attending counselling. - Low risk to re-offend. - The impact on the victim is significant and permanent.

She has felt, mistakenly, blameworthy for these events and angry with herself, sad, anxious, hurt, wounded, betrayed, angry, bitter, resentful, worried, ashamed, depressed, violated, humiliated and vulnerable. Intermittent prison 90 days Prison sentence R. v. Ruby , [2019] N.J. No. 155 (N.L.P.C.) - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Found guilty of having posted an intimate image of his former partner in provocative lingerie on Facebook for all to see. - The picture was taken down few hours later. - No prior conviction. - Lack of remorse. - No victim impact statement filed. Prison 21 days R. c.

Lapointe , 2019 QCCQ 4523 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Criminal harassment s. 264 - Breach of undertaking s. 145(5.1) - After the end of their relationship, the accused sent the victim a text message threatening that he would publish a video of her performing fellatio on him. - The victim called the police which warned the accused not to publish the video. - Despite the warning, the accused uploaded the video on two pornography websites, attaching a title containing the full name of the victim and indicating that she is a prostitute. - The face of the victim was visible and recognizable. - Guilty plea. - No prior conviction. - P.S.R. indicates that the risk of reoffending could not be eliminated. - Immature, lack of accountability.

Prison 90 days (30 days for each count) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v . T.D. , 2018 ABPC 232 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - When the victim broke off a three year relationship with the accused, he became angry and posted intimate pictures of her on a public website known as “myex.com” with her full name as title. - These images were viewed by at least 7,000 people online. - She began to receive unsolicited messages on her Facebook page from strangers.

The messages referred to the victim’s body and some of the messages included the intimate images with a link to the website. - Guilty plea. - 25 years old. - No prior convictions. - Sincere remorse. - Favourable P.S.R. - The victim has suffered from severe anxiety and depression, which has resulted in her requiring counselling and medical help. She said she has felt non-stop stress, feelings of guilt, shame, worthlessness and embarrassment. She said she feels constant humiliation every time she goes anywhere because she does not know who has seen the images and who has not. She feels like she cannot trust anyone.

She said she gets constant nightmares and flashbacks, and the images are constantly on her mind. The situation has also affected her relationship with her boyfriend. She said at first she was so depressed that she had trouble caring for her daughter. Prison 3 months R. v. M.T.B., 2019 BCPC 77 - Publication of image s. 162.1 - Criminal harassment s. 264 - Found guilty after trial. - The parties had been in a relationship.

Upset about their breakup, the accused sent a number of harassing and sexually inappropriate text messages to the victim. - The accused was found guilty of posting a 43 seconds video of the victim performing fellatio on him on is Facebook page, Xvid and Pornhub . - Her face was clearly visible in the video. - He attended counselling for anger management and anxiety. - One prior conviction for fraud. - According to the P.S.R., he poses a moderate risk of engaging in future persistent communication or harassing behaviour. - Important impact on the victim.

She had to seek alternative employment as a result of the accused's harassment toward her and had to disclose to her father and others in her life that she had been victimized. Prison 5 months Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v.

Haines- Matthews , 2018 ABPC 264 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim had one sexual intercourse after they met on Facebook . - The accused recorded the intercourse and took nude photographs of the victim. - He took photographs of himself with the victim naked; which he sent to his ex-girlfriend to make her mad. - He then posted the video and 5 nude photos on Facebook and Instagram , using a fake account on the victim’s name. - The account had 51 followers. - Guilty plea. - Young age (18 at the time of the offence) - Youth criminal record and one conviction as an adult. - No Victim Impact Statement was filed.

Prison 5 months R. v. A.C ., 2017 ONCJ 317 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim had been in a relationship for four years. - Several months after their relationship ended, the accused posted 5 videos of the victim having intercourse, and 17 nude photos, on pornography websites. - The title of the video and photos disclosed her name. Her age, and place of birth also appeared in one of the website. - Her face was visible in some of the videos and photos. - Guilty plea. - No prior conviction. - Some remorse. - Devastating impact on the victim. She suffered a severe depression.

She spent hours trying to have the images removed by contacting various websites. She had to take time off work, affecting her income. She was unable to focus on her studies, which caused her grades to suffer. She will never trust anyone again and knows that this will affect all her future relationships with her family and friends because she is afraid of what people have seen of her. She continues to receive messages on social media from strangers who ask her to perform sexual acts. Prison 5 months Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. Pawley, (N.L.

P.C.) - Publication ofintimate image s.162.1 - Breachingconditions s.145(3) - The accused and thecomplainant wereinvolved in an on-againoff-again intimaterelationship for threeyears. - They had an argumentby text message andduring that argument theaccused sent her two nudeimages of his ex-wife. - The face of her ex-wifewas visible. - Guilty plea. - He has criminalconvictions, including 2counts of assault against hisex-wife. - He was at large on bailpending trial when hecommitted these offences. - The victim (ex-wife) saidthat the offence affected heremotionally and physically.She has chronic headachesdue to stress, and she haddeveloped anxiety.

She hadnausea, and had to take highblood pressure andantidepressant medication.She is still attendingcounseling. Prison 180 days (150 days for162.1) R. v. Greene, (N.L. P.C.) - Uttering deaththreats s. 264.1 - Publication ofimage s. 162.1 - Assaulting policeofficer s. 270 - Breachingconditions s.145(3) - The accused and thevictim had been involvedin a relationship for twoyears.

They have onechild. - Upset about theirbreakup, he threatened tokill her twice. - He sent a video of thevictim, having sexualintercourse with anotherman, to one of her friends. - Guilty plea. - 2 prior convictions. - Unemployed. - The offense caused thevictim fear andembarrassment. Prison 8 months (5 months for162.1) (less 108 daysenhanced creditin pretrialcustody) R. v.

J.R.,2018 ONCJ 851 - Uttering deaththreats s. 264.1 - Publication ofimage s. 162.1 - Criminalharassment s. 264 - The accused and thevictim had been marriedfor 8 years and have twochildren. - He accused her ofinfidelity and for the nextmonths, he communicatedrepeatedly with her andthreatened to kill her andher alleged lover. - He created an ad on aprostitute website in thename of the victim.

Helisted her name and cellphone number and postedphotos showing herengaged in explicit sexualactivity. - Guilty plea. - No criminal record. - Sincere remorse. -Abused drugs during thecommission of the offences. - Attended N.A. meetings. - Attended angermanagement counselling. Prison 8 months (60 days for162.1) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v . Wilson , 2019 ONCJ 277 - assault s. 266 - forcible confinement s. 279(2) - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused was found guilty after trial. - The accused and the victim had been involved in an intimate relationship. - The victim received from another woman a sex video of her performing oral sex on the accused. - Over the course of the next several hours, the accused assaulted her and prevented her from leaving the apartment. - Days later, the accused created a fake Instagram account and posted three sex videos plus eight other screenshots, all of a sexual nature.

As well, he added captions, calling the victim a sex trade worker. He also tagged the victim’s real account so her friends and family would see the images. - 26 years old. - No prior convictions. - Not a Canadian citizen. - The emotional impact on the victim has been severe. She was devastated. She immediately contacted the accused demanding that he removes the account, which he ignored. She suffers from anxiety and depression. She feels distrust, which has affected her other relationships. She has changed her phone number and social media accounts because strangers continue to contact her. She feels unsafe.

Prison 9 months total (6 months less a day for 162.1) R . v. M.R. , 2017 ONCJ 943 - Publication of image s. 162.1 - Criminal harassment s. 264 - Found guilty after trial. - The accused and the victim were engaged. When the engagement ended, the accused criminally harassed the victim using electronic communications. - He distributed intimate photos he had received from the victim to multiples members of her family and friends, both in Canada, and overseas. - The photos distribution demonstrates premeditation, and steps taken to avoid detection.

He used an anonymous email service to distribute the intimate photos on two separate occasions, more than a month apart. - No prior convictions. - The impact on the victim and family is devastating. Prison 9 months (5 months for s.162.1) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. c. Gosselin , 2020 QCCQ 2653 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim had been involved in a short virtual relationship. - After they met once, the victim ended the relationship. - The accused threatened the victim to send 14 intimate pictures to a third party. - Despite the shame, despair and suicidal thoughts the victim was experiencing in the face of this threat, the accused nevertheless sent the pictures. - The victim then committed suicide. - Guilty plea. - The accused is diagnosed with bipolar affective disorder, as well with an anxiety-depressive mood. Prison 10 months R. v.

S.A. , 2022 MBPC 28 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Breach of undertaking s. 145(4)(a) - The accused and victim had been in an on again/off again relationship for four years. - When he found out that the victim has had sexual intercourse with another man, he posted approximately 15 nude photos of her on his personal Twitter account. - He had around 434 followers on his Twitte r account at the time, so all of them would have immediately received the photos in their inbox. - The photos included pictures where the victim’s face was clearly visible, where her breasts were exposed and where she was in her underwear. - Guilty plea. - Young adult. - No prior convictions. - P.S.R. positive, low risk of reoffending. - No Victim Impact Statement were filed.

Prison 9 months for 162.1 + 15 days for 145(4)

a) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. Parsons, (N.L.

P.C.) - CriminalHarassment s. 264 - Publication ofintimate image s.162.1 - Mischief(damage to theiPhone) s. 430 - Breach ofundertaking s.145(4)(a) - Breach of courtorder s. 145(5)(a) - Unable to accept that hisrelationship with thevictim had ended, theaccused continuouslycalled, emailed and textedher. - He sent a photograph ofher performing oral sex onhim to her mother. - He came to her placeand threw a kitchen chair,kicked over the children’sthings, put a hole in thekitchen wall and smashedthe victim’s iPhone. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - He turned to alcohol anddrugs, specifically cocaine,to help him cope with theirbreakup. - He had attendedcounselling. - Sincere remorse.

Prison 10 months (4 months for162.1) R. v.

C.P.,2021 ONCJ 356 - Publication ofintimate image s.162.1 - Criminalharassment s. 264 - Extortion s. 346 - The accused and thevictim were sociallyconnected through thepersons they were dating:she was the ex-girlfriendof his girlfriend’s brother. - The accused came inpossession of an intimatepicture of the victim. - He sent a Snapchatmessage from anunknown account statingthat he had nude imagesof the victim, and that hewould post them on theinternet with her personalidentifiers if she did notprovide him with more. - Over the next days, thevictim received multiplemessages on herInstagram account frommen advising that theyhad learned of her accountafter it was posted on anonline message boardalongside the picture ofher naked breast.

Her faceor any other identifier wasnot visible. - Further demands weremade, saying that she hadto send him nude imagesand videos immediately orthere would beconsequences. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - Young age (22 years old). - Sincere remorse. - Favourable P.S.R. - Low risk of reoffending. - Important impact on thevictim. She describes lastingnegative thoughts andfeelings that have prompteddepression, anxiety and panicattacks. She no longer feelssafe anywhere – not online,in public, or even in her ownhome. Prison 12 months (4 months forthe 162.1) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. Ly , [2016] O.J. No. 7196 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 (3 counts) - 3 different victims. -The accused had in the past relationships with each of the victims. As a result of those relationships, he obtained video recordings of intimate activities involving the victims and, later, posted those recordings on pornography websites. - Before posting the recordings, the accused threaten the victims. - For one of the victim, he used a slight variant on the spelling of her name. - Guilty plea. - No prior convictions. - The consequences on the victims were devastating. They felt humiliated and helpless.

One of the victim ended up drinking alcohol and taking sleeping pills to cope. Prison 12 months (less 9 days enhanced credit in pretrial custody) R. v.

McFarlane , 2018 MBCA 48 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - Voyeurism s. 162 - Extortion s. 346 - The victim is the accused’s sister friend. - The accused (19 years old) surreptitiously video recorded the complainant (17 years old) undressing and showering when she was in the bathroom. - Five years later, he decided to attempt to extort sexually explicit material or activity from the complainant by threatening to distribute intimate images. - He created multiple email accounts under pseudonyms, he extracted several nude or semi-nude still images and he manipulated the images using software to hide their source. - He sent emails from the fake accounts with the intimate images to the victim and her sister.

He did not published them on the Internet. - Guilty plea. - Young age (26 years old at sentencing). - No prior convictions. - Unhealthy interest in pornography. - Low risk of reoffending in general but moderate-high risk category for sexual offences. - Significant impact on the victim’s physical and mental health. The events terrified her, exacerbated her anxiety disorder and took over her life. She lived in constant fear that the extortionist had more intimate images of her and was going to eventually hurt, rape or kill her. She struggled in university, was physically ill and could not sleep.

She became disassociated and lost her self-esteem. The intensity of her emotions and fear became so unbearable that she contemplated suicide to free herself from the grip of the extortionist. Prison 18 months total (6 months for s. 162.1) Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence

R. v. J.S ., 2018 ONCJ 82 - Publication of intimate image s. 162.1 - The accused and the victim had been involved in a relationship. - The victim agreed to record their sexual activity, but over time, she did not wished to be video recorded anymore. He continued to film her with hidden cameras. - He posted on a pornography website 11 video of the victim engaged in sexual activity. All of them bore the name of the victim. - As of December of 2017, several of the videos had been viewed over 10,000 times. - He also posted and ad on a prostitution website with the victim’s information.

She received over 300 messages or calls in one night. - No prior conviction. - He had been struggling with an addiction to “crystal meth”. - Remorse. - The victim has been devastated by this offence and had tried to commit suicide on several occasions. She has been diagnosed with several psychiatric conditions, including depression and anxiety. Prison 18 months Decision Relevant facts Relevant factors Sentence