R. v. Vaugeois and Adams Date:, 2015 BCPC 215

Citation: R. v. Vaugeois and Adams Date: 20150528 2015 BCPC 0215 File No: 198553-2-C Registry: Surrey IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Criminal Division REGINA v. NATASHA RENEE VAUGEOIS and SEAN EWART KEVIN ADAMS ORAL REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE J.I.S. SUTHERLAND Counsel for the Crown: W. Dawson, Q.C., P. Barclay Counsel for N. Vaugeois : J. Percival Counsel for S. Adams : D. Tarnow Place of Hearing: Surrey , B.C. Dates of Hearing: December 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 2013; January 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14,

29, 30, April 14, 15, 16, 17, May 13, 14, 15, 16, July 28, 29, 30, August 27, 28, September 4, October 31, December 8, 2014; February 20, April 17, 2015; Date of Judgment: May 28, 2015 INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] Sean Adams and Natasha Vaugeois were convicted of a number of offences after a trial. They are now before me for sentencing. [ 2 ] The convictions for Ms. Vaugeois relate to three women engaged in prostitution. Some of the convictions relate to facilitating the acts of prostitution and profiting from them, while others relate to oppressive, violent and intimidating acts against the same women. [ 3 ] Mr.

Adams was convicted as a co-accused with Ms. Vaugeois with respect to acts committed against one of the women. He has also been convicted of prostitution-related offences and violent acts against that same woman, that were charged separately from those acts Ms. Vaugeois was convicted of. [ 4 ] The Crown asserts that the appropriate sentence for Ms. Vaugeois is a cumulative sentence of three to five years in jail. For Mr. Adams, it has been argued that a cumulative sentence of five to eight years in jail is appropriate. [ 5 ] On behalf of Ms.

Vaugeois, a 90-day intermittent jail term is suggested for offences for which a conditional sentence order is unavailable and otherwise a global 18-to-21-month conditional sentence is submitted as appropriate for the other offences. Mr. Adams argues that a sentence of four years is appropriate for his offences. The suggested sentences would then have time served in custody deducted from them. [ 6 ] To arrive at the appropriate sentence, I must consider the circumstances of the offences and the circumstances of Ms. Vaugeois and Mr. Adams in the context of the purposes and principles of sentencing outlined in

Part XXIII of the Criminal Code . [ 7 ] With respect to an overview of the offences, I will only provide a

summary of the circumstances for each offence. A detailed description of the circumstances behind the offences is contained in my reasons for judgment dated December 8th, 2014. OFFENCES COMMITTED BY MS. VAUGEOIS Counts 1 to 4: Offences Against S.S. [ 8 ] S.S. came to Surrey as a drug-addicted 17-year-old. She had one friend in Surrey, who introduced her to Bobby Miskenack and Augusto Duminuco, whom I will refer to as "Bobby" and "Tino," as this is how they were referred to at trial and in my reasons for judgment. Not long after being introduced, S.S. moved in with Bobby and Tino at their apartment.

Shortly thereafter, Bobby and Tino were jailed, leaving S.S. alone at the apartment. Bobby and Tino and Ms. Vaugeois were friends or acquaintances. When Bobby and Tino were in jail, one of them asked Ms. Vaugeois to check on S.S. She did, and it was then that S.S. and Ms. Vaugeois met for the first time. [ 9 ] The offences took place over the next two nights and three days. Ms. Vaugeois learned S.S. worked in the sex trade. She updated S.S.'s escort ads on Craigslist with S.S.'s consent; however, she also changed their content and S.S.'s rates for her services, without input from S.S. Ms.

Vaugeois demanded the proceeds from S.S. when she was paid by clients who responded to the new ads. In effect, Ms. Vaugeois exploited S.S. by increasing her workload and coercing her to hand over the proceeds from the work, resulting in Ms. Vaugeois' conviction for living on the avails of prostitution, contrary to s. 212(1) (

j) of the Criminal Code . In the end, S.S. estimates that she gave Ms. Vaugeois between $450 and $600 of her earnings as a prostitute. [ 10 ] As part of the coercion, on the second day, S.S. resisted Ms. Vaugeois' demand to hand over the proceeds after one of S.S.'s "dates." Ms. Vaugeois became angry, grabbed S.S.'s arm and told her to hand over the money or Ms. Vaugeois would "smash her out." This encounter comprises the assault in Count 2 and threatening in Count 3. It is also a part of the threatening and menacing behaviour Ms.

Vaugeois used to induce S.S. to hand over her prostitution earnings, thus constituting the extortion in Count 1. Counts 14 and 15: Offences Against K.P. [ 11 ] The offences Ms. Vaugeois committed against K.P., Count 14, living on the avails of prostitution, and Count 15, assault, took place between May 22nd and July 19th, 2011. In May 2011, K.P. met Ms. Vaugeois' housemate at the time, Mike Zaprova, on Facebook. Shortly thereafter, K.P. travelled to Surrey from Kelowna to meet him, arriving on May 22nd, 2011. When she arrived, she met Ms. Vaugeois for the first time. K.P.'s plan was to stay a few days with Mr.

Zaprova and Ms. Vaugeois and then head back to Kelowna. [ 12 ] K.P. was 20 years old at the time, she was modestly educated, and at 18, was diagnosed with myotonic muscular dystrophy, a condition that caused weakened muscles and fatigue, among other symptoms. She also had a drinking problem. She had not worked in the sex trade before. [ 13 ] Once in Surrey, K.P. lived at Ms. Vaugeois' home, staying longer than planned. Within a week or two of arriving, she was working as a prostitute out of Ms. Vaugeois' home where she performed some of her "dates," while doing other calls out of the home.

K.P. estimated she performed approximately 20 dates in total while living at Ms. Vaugeois' home, including approximately five outcalls. She said sometimes she spoke to clients to arrange the dates, but usually Ms. Vaugeois arranged them. Ms. Vaugeois set K.P.'s rates.

K.P. testified that she made between $150 and $200 per date, all of which she gave to Ms. Vaugeois. She said of all the money she earned, which was at least $3,000, she only kept a $20 tip that she hid from Ms. Vaugeois. Ms. Vaugeois controlled the money and rationed it out to K.P. on an as-needed basis. [ 14 ] Ms. Vaugeois created advertisements, advertising K.P. to be a prostitute and placed the advertisements on the internet or in the newspaper. She consistently refreshed the ads to keep them in priority sequence online.

She provided her bedroom for K.P. to use with clients and told K.P. what she should wear for dates. Ms. Vaugeois instructed her on a protocol to follow when meeting clients from the initial introduction, to handling money. Ms. Vaugeois also covered taxi fare for outcalls. These services provided for K.P. were not for K.P.'s safety and security as much as they were for Ms. Vaugeois' financial gain. [ 15 ] This was not a legitimate living arrangement between them that involved sharing expenses for their mutual benefit. Rather, Ms. Vaugeois' exploitation of K.P. went well beyond that. Ms.

Vaugeois lived off the avails of K.P.'s prostitution earnings in a parasitic manner. K.P.'s prostitution earnings were used to support Ms. Vaugeois' lifestyle. Ms. Vaugeois relied on the proceeds from K.P.'s prostitution as an easy and parasitic way to cover household and personal expenses, her ability to subsidize her friend staying over, her drug supply, and other lifestyle amenities. [ 16 ] K.P.'s relationship with Ms. Vaugeois had highs and lows, and at times Ms. Vaugeois showed her acts of kindness. She also experienced coercion from Ms. Vaugeois, and other controlling behaviour.

She was financially dependent on Ms. Vaugeois through Ms. Vaugeois' calculated actions. She was also assaulted by Ms. Vaugeois when Ms. Vaugeois punched her in the head once when Ms. Vaugeois claimed to be upset about the upheaval in her house caused by K.P. and her romantic relationships with two men. The punch was hard enough to leave a lump on K.P.'s head. The punch was calculated by Ms. Vaugeois to make a point. [ 17 ] K.P. was exploited through the boss/friend dynamic created by Ms. Vaugeois. Ms.

Vaugeois needed K.P. to keep working in order to maintain her lifestyle, but she also needed to keep K.P. from exposing her, as it became apparent K.P. was becoming increasingly unhappy. She did this through a combination of coercion, benevolence and persuasion. This was a calculated play by Ms. Vaugeois, just as she described her punch to K.P.'s head as not impulsive, but a calculated move to make a point. [ 18 ] A Victim Impact Statement was provided by K.P. and it is clear that the trauma she suffered as a result of her time with Ms. Vaugeois has deeply affected her.

Counts 5 to 12: Offences Committed by both Accused Against C.C. [ 19 ] C.C. was 42 years old at the time of trial. She had struggled with drug addiction since she was a teenager. She moved to Surrey in 2009, approximately one year before the offences were committed against her. She supported herself by working as a prostitute, dealing drugs and receiving disability benefits. [ 20 ] C.C. met Sean Adams after she moved to Surrey. She bought crack cocaine from him and sometimes sold drugs for him. Their relationship evolved into a friendship and eventually a sexual relationship.

It also involved a coercive authority that Mr. Adams asserted over her. He established a pattern of asserting his power over her whenever he felt he needed to remind her to be compliant with his authority. To summarize their relationship, in the course of her association with Mr. Adams, he manipulated and controlled her.

He played upon her vulnerabilities, her drug addiction, her need for companionship and her fear, and he would cultivate a positive, nurturing relationship resulting in an emotional and physical dependence, but then limit any independence it created by creating fear and intimidation in her through violence, all for his own purposes. [ 21 ] C.C. met Ms. Vaugeois through Mr. Adams, as Mr. Adams and Ms. Vaugeois were friends. The first time C.C. met Ms. Vaugeois was at Mr. Adams' apartment just before Christmas 2010. C.C. and Ms.

Vaugeois met only a few times after that, including during some of the incidents leading to the convictions. Count 5: Assault by Mr. Adams [ 22 ] In April 2010, Mr. Adams went to C.C.'s rooming house and confronted her about a drug debt. He punched her in the face and threw her onto the ground. When she got up, he punched her in the face again. The confrontation caused C.C.'s eye to be swollen and black. [ 23 ] C.C. and Mr. Adams re-established their relationship in the fall of 2010. C.C. was working the streets as a prostitute and in active addiction to heroin and crack cocaine. She bought drugs off Mr.

Adams for herself and for resale. Count 6: Assault by Ms. Vaugeois Count 7: Assault with a Weapon by Mr. Adams [ 24 ] Early in 2011, C.C. was summoned to Mr. Adams' apartment by a mutual acquaintance. When C.C. arrived, Mr. Adams, Ms. Vaugeois, and a friend of Mr. Adams and Ms. Vaugeois named Christine Jones, were present. Mr. Adams accused C.C. of spreading false information about his relationship with C.C. Ms. Vaugeois then kicked the side of C.C.’s face, punched the back of her arm and the

back of her head. Christine Jones then swung a belt at her, striking her above her left eye with the metal buckle. The blow cut C.C. and sprayed blood on her, the couch, the blinds, and the floor of Mr. Adams' apartment. C.C. yelled for them to stop, but Mr. Adams hit her on the back with a dish rack with enough force to knock her to the ground and break the dish rack. Mr. Adams then grabbed a dumbbell and placed it over her neck, with the bar on her throat and the weights on either side of her neck. He held it down and she had problems breathing.

Eventually he got up and told her to clean up the mess "she made." [ 25 ] Ms. Vaugeois helped C.C. to the bathroom and got her a cold facecloth. Ms. Vaugeois and Ms. Jones helped clean the blood off her and cleaned the blood in the living room. C.C. did not seek medical attention for her injuries, which she described as a cut above her left eye and bruising around her face. [ 26 ] The next day, while delivering drugs to Ms. Vaugeois, Ms. Vaugeois apologized for hitting C.C. She said she just did what Mr. Adams told her to do. [ 27 ] After the beating, C.C. and Mr.

Adams spent time together and resumed their relationship. Mr. Adams apologized to C.C. for the beating. [ 28 ] This closeness lasted about two months before C.C. went on one of her many crack binges. It lasted two weeks, until July 27th, 2011. That effectively marked the beginning of the end of her relationship with Mr. Adams. I will get to the offences committed around that time in a moment, but first I will address Count 8, living on the avails of prostitution by Mr. Adams. Count 8: Living on the Avails of Prostitution – Mr. Adams [ 29 ] Around the end of December 2010, Mr.

Adams asked C.C. to come to his apartment to discuss a drug debt owed by friends of hers and to bring those friends with her. C.C. arrived alone. Mr. Adams asked for the money from the sale of the drugs. When C.C. said she did not have it, Mr. Adams punched her in the face and chest. To remedy the debt, it was agreed between C.C. and Mr. Adams that C.C. would pay Mr. Adams $200 of her prostitution earnings each night that she worked, keep him supplied in cigars, and give him any crystal methamphetamine she had so Mr. Adams could sell it to his customers.

C.C. agreed to the arrangement out of self- preservation. [ 30 ] For the next week, C.C. worked as a prostitute and gave Mr. Adams the proceeds, cigars, crystal methamphetamine and marihuana each day. In total, she estimates she gave Mr. Adams just under $1,000 of her prostitution earnings. After the first week, Mr. Adams apologized for assaulting her, but told her he had to make an example out of her because he did not feel the obligation to pay him for the drugs he fronted was being taken seriously. C.C. and Mr.

Adams resumed their relationship and C.C. continued working as a prostitute. [ 31 ] In the beginning of 2011, C.C. gave Mr. Adams less and less money from her prostitution earnings. She said she eventually stopped paying Mr. Adams cash, but kept giving him cigars, crystal methamphetamine and marihuana. Mr. Adams knew she was a prostitute and knew that the debt he imposed on her was paid from the proceeds of her prostitution. The money she paid to Mr.

Adams and the cigars and drugs were all direct or indirect proceeds of her work as a prostitute, and furthermore, the money, cigars and drugs she paid him were the result of her being manipulated and coerced by Mr. Adams to provide him with those items to support his lifestyle. Count 9: Assault with a Weapon by Mr. Adams Count 10: Robbery by Mr. Adams and Ms. Vaugeois Count 11: Assault by Ms. Vaugeois Count 12: Extortion by Mr. Adams and Ms. Vaugeois [ 32 ] The events leading to these convictions took place on July 27th, 2011. They were part of a continuous sequence of events.

That day, C.C. learned her disability cheque had been diverted to Mr. Adams' and Ms. Vaugeois' friend, Christine Jones. C.C. confronted Mr. Adams on the telephone, and the two agreed to meet to discuss it further. [ 33 ] Mr. Adams picked up C.C. in his truck. Christine Jones and another friend of Mr. Adams were already in the truck. He drove to Ms. Vaugeois' home. Mr. Adams and C.C. argued further in the yard of Ms. Vaugeois' home. Mr. Adams then directed C.C. into the home. Christine Jones and Adams' other friend entered as well, and along with Ms. Vaugeois, they all gathered in Ms.

Vaugeois' bedroom. [ 34 ] In the bedroom, Mr. Adams confronted C.C. about her disappearing on a crack binge. Ms. Vaugeois kicked C.C.'s upper body with enough force to knock her against the wall. She also punched C.C. in the face once and punched her three or four more times. This was the assault that constituted Ms. Vaugeois' conviction on Count 11. [ 35 ] C.C. was then taken in Mr. Adams' truck to Cash Mart, where she usually cashed her Government-issued cheques. Christine Jones handed C.C. her disability cheque and she and Ms.

Vaugeois accompanied C.C. inside where C.C. cashed her cheque in the amount of $821.42. As they left, C.C. handed the proceeds to Christine Jones. C.C. did not consent to her cheque being diverted. Further, she was coerced from the beating she took at Ms. Vaugeois' home and the threatening conduct of Mr. Adams, Ms. Vaugeois and Christine

Jones into accompanying them to Cash Mart to cash her cheque and hand over the proceeds. This constituted the robbery and extortion convictions in Counts 10 and 12. [ 36 ] When they left Cash Mart, they all returned in Mr. Adams' truck back to Ms. Vaugeois' home and gathered once again in Ms. Vaugeois' bedroom. In the bedroom, Mr. Adams produced a two-and-a-half-foot-long metal bar and struck C.C. in the ribs. The blow backed her up against the wall. He struck her one or two more times with the bar, inflicting considerable pain. Mr.

Adams then grabbed the other end of the bar, put it against her throat, pinning her against the wall. She said he held the bar against her throat for just a few moments. This event comprises the assault with a weapon conviction against Mr. Adams in Count 9. [ 37 ] After the assault, Mr. Adams told C.C. she had to pay him $10,000 and that she could stay at Ms. Vaugeois' home. Once Mr. Adams was gone, Ms. Vaugeois asked if C.C. could work as a prostitute that night to start earning money to pay off the debt. C.C. said she thought she could, and Ms.

Vaugeois obtained some heroin for C.C. to keep her from getting sick. She also arranged for C.C. to attend a call for an escort. C.C. went on the call, but never returned to Ms. Vaugeois' house. [ 38 ] I will now turn to the circumstances of each accused. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ACCUSED Natasha Vaugeois [ 39 ] A number of sources of information were placed before the court regarding Ms. Vaugeois that supplemented the submissions of counsel. Among them were her criminal record, Pre-Sentence Reports dated September 23rd, 2010 and February 18th, 2015, a Psychological Assessment prepared by Dr.

Stangeland dated February 13th, 2015, character letters, and a letter from Ms. Vaugeois. I have read and considered all of these sources, but will only refer to some of the information. [ 40 ] Ms. Vaugeois is 37 years of age. She achieved a Grade 10 or 11 education, having dropped out of school at the age of 15 or 16. She spent her teen years in foster homes, group homes, and living on her own. She has collected Income Assistance since she was 16 years old. She has worked intermittently as a prostitute since she was 17 and engaged in other illegal activity to make money.

She said she stopped working as a prostitute on February 28, 2013, the day she was arrested on the current charges. Any legitimate employment she has had has been short term. [ 41 ] Ms. Vaugeois is a single mother with two children aged 16 and ten, who currently live with her. A number of the character letters refer to Ms. Vaugeois being a committed and a loving mother. I am sure she loves her children very much, but it is hard to reconcile with the evidence that she brought her children along to the parasitic and destructive lifestyle she was leading, consisting of drugs, prostitution and violence.

No child deserves that. Her kids were seized by the Ministry of Children and Families in 2007 for a year because of her lifestyle, and recently her youngest child was temporarily taken away in November 2014 due to her boyfriend's, at the time, drug use and criminal behaviour. [ 42 ] Ms. Vaugeois has intermittently struggled with substance abuse in the past, with crystal methamphetamine being her drug of choice. She says she is currently sober, although the information before the court is inconsistent as to how long that has been the case. [ 43 ] Ms.

Vaugeois was not completely forthcoming with the author of the Pre-Sentence Report, Ms. O'Hara. There were inconsistencies in some of the information she provided. Furthermore, despite being required to provide her address to Ms. O'Hara as part of a sentence she was serving, she was deceptive with Ms. O'Hara about where she was living in November 2014. Despite this deception, however, she has never been charged with breaching what are restrictive bail conditions. [ 44 ] In November 2013, Ms. Vaugeois successfully completed a nine-week life skills program called Sources Empowerment.

According to the facilitator of that course, she was an engaged participant. She has expressed a desire to take a number of other rehabilitative programs and the character letters suggest a desire for, and some movement towards, self-improvement. [ 45 ] Ms. Vaugeois has the support of her children and other members of the community who have written character letters, and some of whom have attended court for her sentencing. [ 46 ] Ms.

Vaugeois has a relatively minor criminal record, consisting of communication for the purpose of prostitution offences in 1996 and 1997, possession or use of a stolen credit card conviction on September 27th, 2010, and a false pretence under $5,000 conviction in January 2014. [ 47 ] Of significance is the conviction on September 27th, 2010 for possession or use of a stolen credit card. Ms. Vaugeois received a suspended sentence, with one year probation. She was subject to that probation order when she committed the present offences. [ 48 ] As for the offences Ms. Vaugeois committed against C.C., she told Dr.

Stangeland that she was coerced into them by Mr. Adams so she had no choice. She admitted to shaking S.S., but that was it. She was regretful generally with her relationships with the victims. In her letter to the court, she expressed remorse for the hurt she caused, but Dr. Stangeland felt she generally minimized her responsibility for the offences. [ 49 ] Ms. Vaugeois underwent a psychological assessment by Dr. Stangeland of the Forensic Psychiatric Services in January 2015. Dr.

Stangeland concluded that she had low intellectual capacity and likely has a personality disorder, marked by dependent, avoidant, and self-defeating features, which makes her vulnerable to abuse and exploitation by others. He put her at a low-to-moderate risk for future violent behaviour. Further, that future violent behaviour would likely be reactive, or for the purpose of carrying out the wishes of a dominant person.

Sean Adams [ 50 ] A number of sources of information were placed before the court regarding Mr. Adams; his criminal record, transcripts providing details of the circumstances of some of his convictions, a Pre-Sentence Report dated February 17th, 2015, a psychological assessment by Dr. Stangeland dated February 13, 2015, certificates for programs taken while in custody, character evidence from his friend, Kristoff Piel, character letters, as well as a statement that he made in court. They were all tendered in evidence and supplemented by the submissions of counsel.

I have read and considered all of these sources, but will only refer to some of the information. [ 51 ] Sean Adams is 40 years old. He is an only child who comes from a stable home, free of abuse. Indeed, his parents provided a positive model for family life, according to Mr. Adams. They remain supportive of him. Mr. Adams has a 19-year-old daughter from a previous relationship. He was in a common-law relationship with Christine Jones and is currently in a relationship with Crystal Wells, who is also supportive of him. [ 52 ] Mr.

Adams graduated from high school and went on to community college, obtaining a certificate in business administration. His more recent legitimate employment has consisted of working as a disc jockey at night clubs and doing salvage and demolition work with a friend. He has also trafficked marihuana and hard drugs. He has no ongoing physical health problems, and other than possibly anxiety, no mental health challenges, with the exception of those diagnosed by Dr. Stangeland when conducting the psychological assessment for the court. I will outline those later in these reasons. [ 53 ] When not in custody, Mr.

Adams is a heavy daily consumer of marihuana. He says he does not consume hard drugs, because he has seen it destroy many people. Some of those people are no doubt those who he has sold drugs to. [ 54 ] Mr. Adams has a criminal record. Since 1996, he has 15 criminal convictions. Some of his convictions are for drug offences, including possession for the purpose of trafficking in 2005, for which he received a 12-month conditional sentence. [ 55 ] Of particular note, however, is between 1996 and 2010, he was convicted of assault six times.

His 2006 conviction garnered a six-month conditional sentence with one year probation, and his 2010 conviction resulted in a 56-day jail sentence, with one year probation. In addition to those six convictions, on February 19th, 2013, Mr. Adams was convicted of another assault, assault with a weapon and uttering threats. The offence dates were March 6th, 2011. Mr. Adams received the equivalent of 18 months jail and two years’ probation. [ 56 ] Transcripts have been tendered in evidence outlining the facts behind the assault convictions in 2006, 2010 and the convictions in February 2013.

They were all against women, the latter two against women engaged in prostitution. [ 57 ] The circumstances behind Mr. Adams' 2013 convictions have some similarity to those convictions where C.C. was beaten at his apartment. A drug-addicted prostitute who owed Mr. Adams a drug debt was summoned to his apartment. There, he punched her in the face multiple times, kicked her and hit her with a metal stick. He then ordered her to clean up her blood from the floor and couch. He implied that she would be killed if she went to the police.

He also told her she owed him money and eventually would let her know when the debt had been repaid. [ 58 ] It is important to bear in mind that the offences Mr. Adams committed against C.C. occurred before he was sentenced for the assault with a weapon and threatening in February 2013.

Consequently, I cannot rely on that sentence as part of a step-up analysis to increase the sentence that I will impose. [ 59 ] Evidence of similar or other discreditable conduct consisting of tried or untried offences occurring before or after the predicate offence are relevant to show a pattern of behaviour, character, prospects of rehabilitation, the need for specific deterrence, and risk.

Although I cannot use the sentence he received in February 2013 to step up his current sentence, I do consider it in that context. [ 60 ] Between serving a sentence on the February 2013 convictions and not having bail on the current charges, Mr. Adams has been in custody since February 19th, 2013. In that time, he has completed modules of the Essential Skills to Success program offered at Fraser Regional Correctional Centre. Respectful Relationships and Substance Abuse are among the modules. [ 61 ] Character letters were also submitted, which I have reviewed. [ 62 ] In his psychiatric assessment of Mr. Adams, Dr.

Stangeland concluded that Mr. Adams generally minimized any criminal responsibility for his past convictions and noted that Mr. Adams denies responsibilities for his offences against C.C. It is Dr. Stangeland's opinion that Mr. Adams probably has an antisocial personality disorder and that he presents a moderate-to-high risk for further violent behaviour, particularly against women. THE LAW [ 63 ] The purposes and principles of sentencing are set out in s. 718 , 718.1 and 718.2 of the Criminal Code . I have considered them in reaching the appropriate sentences for Ms. Vaugeois and Mr.

Adams, but will only mention some. [ 64 ] I have also instructed myself that the failure of both accused to acknowledge committing some of the offences that they have been found guilty of is not an aggravating factor in their sentencing. They are entitled to take that position, but they cannot take advantage of remorse for their actions as a mitigating circumstance when it comes to those matters that they do not take responsibility for. A lack of acknowledgment of responsibility is relevant to the degree of insight, or lack thereof, of their offending behaviour, and thus their rehabilitation prospects.

[ 65 ] I also bear in mind the totality principle of sentencing contained in s. 718.2(c), which requires that the cumulative sentence for an offender who serves consecutive sentences for multiple offences must not exceed their degree of overall culpability. [ 66 ] A number of cases were submitted by Crown counsel and counsel for Ms. Vaugeois. I have read each of those cases and they confirm that sentencing is an individualized process. No two cases are exactly alike and none are identical to the case before me.

Nevertheless, the case law is helpful in highlighting sentencing principles that are prominent in sentencing for offences such as those committed by Ms. Vaugeois and Mr. Adams. The cases also reveal the sentences received for similar offenders committing similar offences under similar circumstances. [ 67 ] Using extortion, assaults and threats to try to manipulate and effectively enslave someone to engage in prostitution, whether they do engage it in or not, requires a sentence that emphasizes general deterrence: R. v. Hayes, [1988] BCJ No. 2752 (BCCA) .

General deterrence, specific deterrence and denunciation require emphasis in sentences for living on the avails of prostitution. Rehabilitation of offenders cannot be ignored, but it is a less-prominent consideration for this type of offence: R. v. Bracey, [1996] BCJ No. 367 (BCCA) . [ 68 ] The cases submitted where non-custodial or Conditional Sentences of imprisonment were imposed for living on the avails of prostitution, lacked as a feature, coercion, threats, intimidation or violence, as was present here.

FINAL ANALYSIS [ 69 ] All three of the victims were particularly vulnerable, whether it be from drug addiction, physical disability, physical and social isolation, or age. They were exploited, degraded, and dehumanized by the accused to support their lifestyle. Intimidation, violence, and coercion were used to control them. [ 70 ] With respect to Ms. Vaugeois, in the time Ms. Vaugeois lived on the avails of S.S.'s and K.P.'s prostitution, she took virtually all their money. The degree of control she exercised over them was substantial. To a significant degree, she took away their liberty. Furthermore, Ms.

Vaugeois' treatment of K.P. was not short-lived. It must also be borne in mind that she committed multiple offences against multiple victims. [ 71 ] Although her criminal record is not extensive and does not contain any crimes of violence, she was on probation at the time she committed the offences. This is obviously an aggravating factor. She has not been charged with breaching her bail, but I have concerns with her conduct while on bail, including not being straightforward with her bail supervisor and associating with the type of individuals who may present a danger to her family.

I also have concerns about the extent to which she takes responsibility for her actions, given the comments of Dr. Stangeland about her minimizing her involvement in the offences. [ 72 ] I find specific deterrence to be a prevalent sentencing goal for Ms. Vaugeois. [ 73 ] In mitigation, Ms. Vaugeois' conduct towards S.S. was short-lived. Her conduct towards C.C. was exercised in discreet incidents, as opposed to ongoing manipulation, as was exercised by Mr. Adams. Furthermore, her actions were more supportive of Mr. Adams' agenda as opposed to a part of a plan that she created.

She apologized to C.C. for hitting her and told her she was following Mr. Adams' direction. Indeed, her involvement is consistent with the profile Dr. Strangeland identified, that she was prone to subordinating herself to the wishes of more dominant people. Further, S.S. and C.C. were already working in the sex trade before they met Ms. Vaugeois. [ 74 ] There were times when Ms. Vaugeois showed some compassion to C.C., such as helping her get cleaned up after she was beaten and bloodied at Mr. Adams' apartment. She also showed some kindness toward K.P. [ 75 ] Despite the concerns noted above, Ms.

Vaugeois has prospects for rehabilitation. She has the support of members of the community who can hopefully assist her in that regard, and two children who should provide motivation towards successful rehabilitation. MR. ADAMS [ 76 ] Mr. Adams physically and mentally abused C.C. in a number of different ways, and did so by playing on her weaknesses. He thoroughly manipulated her, and at times used violence and coercion to do so. The offences he committed all had an element of planning to them, and they were calculated to convey a message.

Some of the messages being sent related to fostering his drug dealing business by instilling fear in her in the event she did not comply with his rules. He brought others in to help effect his plan of intimidating and manipulating C.C. There were multiple offences committed on C.C. that took place over a lengthy period of time and the assaults on C.C. all caused various degrees of injury to her. [ 77 ] Mr. Adams carries with him a criminal record that paints him as a violent individual. The safety of the public is of particular concern on sentencing Mr. Adams. Dr. Stangeland concluded that Mr.

Adams presents a moderate-to-high risk of violent re-offending, and his criminal record shows that successful rehabilitation of Mr. Adams has been elusive. Minimizing his responsibility for past offences and externalizing the blame for those offences to the victims suggests more challenges lie ahead, despite the courses he has taken while in custody. Specific deterrence is a pressing sentencing objective for Mr. Adams. [ 78 ] It is clear Mr. Adams does have some redeeming qualities, as referred to in the character letters, and I am also mindful that Mr.

Adams did not introduce C.C. to the sex trade or get her hooked on drugs. At times he did show kindness towards her. CONCLUSION [ 79 ] Intermittent sentences and Conditional Sentence orders for Ms. Vaugeois would not adequately address the need for general and specific deterrence and denunciation. Neither would a sentence of four years for Mr. Adams. [ 80 ] In my view, a cumulative sentence that would achieve a proper balance of the principles and purposes of sentencing for the

offences Ms. Vaugeois and Mr. Adams committed, in light of their personal backgrounds, is, for Ms. Vaugeois, three years in jail, less 11 days she has served prior to being released on bail, leaving a cumulative remaining sentence to be served of two years and 354 days. [ 81 ] For Mr. Adams, the appropriate cumulative sentence is five years, less two-and-a-half years, or 30 months, time served, leaving a cumulative sentence of two-and-a-half years. Those sentences will be broken down as follows. [ 82 ] For Ms.

Vaugeois, the offences against S.S., Count 1, the extortion, will be six months; Count 2, the assault, three months; Count 3, uttering threats, three months; and Count 4, living on the avails of prostitution, six months, all to be served concurrent with one another. [ 83 ] For the offences against C.C., Count 6, assault, six months; Count 10, robbery, six months; Count 11, assault, six months; and Count 12, extortion, six months.

Those will all be concurrent with each other, but consecutive to Counts 1 to 4. [ 84 ] Finally, with respect to the offences against K.P., Count 14, living on the avails of prostitution, I find the appropriate sentence is three years; however, I am reducing it to two years, in applying the totality principle. The 11 days of pre-sentence custody will be deducted from that two-year sentence. As well, on Count 15, assault, three months. The sentences on Counts 14 and 15 will be concurrent with each other, but consecutive to the other sentences. [ 85 ] With respect to Mr.

Adams, Count 5, the assault, it will be nine months jail, to be served concurrent with the sentence in Count 7, which is the assault with a weapon. That sentence is 18 months; however, I am reducing the sentence on Count 7 to 12 months to comply with the totality principle, and Count 5 will be served concurrent with that, to comply with the totality principle. [ 86 ] With respect to Count 8, living on the avails of prostitution, the appropriate sentence is three years. I will credit Mr. Adams with two-and-a-half years of pre-sentence custody.

The sentence on Count 8 will be served consecutive to Counts 5 and 7. [ 87 ] With respect to Counts 9, 10 and 12, I find the appropriate sentence on all three counts to be 18 months; however, I am reducing it to 12 months on each count to comply with the totality principle. Those three sentences will be served concurrent with each other, but consecutive to the sentence in Count 8 and consecutive to the combined sentence in Counts 5 and 7. ANCILLARY ORDERS [ 88 ] I order that a sample of DNA be provided by each accused, pursuant to s. 487.051 of the Criminal Code .

Those samples will be provided on the kidnapping, robbery and extortion charges, being primary designated offences. [ 89 ] Pursuant to s. 109(2) of the Criminal Code , there will be a ten-year firearms prohibition with respect to Ms. Vaugeois, prohibiting Ms. Vaugeois from owning, possessing or carrying any firearms, prohibited weapons, prohibited devices, ammunition, explosive substance, and all other matters noted under that subsection. [ 90 ] There will be a firearms prohibition for life, pursuant to s. 109(3) of the Criminal Code for Mr.

Adams. [ 91 ] I am waiving the victim fine surcharges, and I am ordering, pursuant to s. 743.21 of the Criminal Code that Mr. Adams have no contact, directly or indirectly, with C.C., and finally, that Ms. Vaugeois have no contact, directly or indirectly, with all three of the victims. (REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED)