R. v. Isto Date:, 2012 BCPC 575

Citation: R. v. Isto Date: 20120405 2012 BCPC 575 File No: 56947-3-C, 56947-4-AC Registry: North Vancouver IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGINA v. DANIEL JUSTIN ISTO REASONS FOR SENTENCE OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE RODGERS BAN ON PUBLICATION 486.4(1) CCC, Restricted Access Counsel for the Crown: R. Edwards Counsel for the Defendant: J. Whysall

Place of Hearing: North Vancouver , B.C. Date of Hearing: March 26, 29, 2012, April 4, 5, 2012 Date of Judgment: April 5, 2012 [ 1 ] THE COURT: Daniel Justin Isto comes before the court for sentencing having entered pleas of guilty to two charges. He has pled guilty to a charge that from the 1st of January, 2011, to the 1st of the August, 2011, inclusive at or near Bowen Island in the Province of British Columbia, he did for a sexual purpose touch directly or indirectly with a part of his body or with an object the body of M.H.J., a person under the age of 16 years.

That charge is contrary to s. 151 of the Criminal Code . [ 2 ] Mr. Isto has also pled guilty to a charge that on or about the 31st day of July, 2011, at or near Bowen Island in the Province of British Columbia he did for a sexual purpose touch directly or indirectly with a part of his body or with an object the body of H.S., a person under the age of 16 years. That charge is contrary to s. 151 of the Criminal Code . [ 3 ] Crown counsel submits that the appropriate disposition would be a sentence of incarceration for a period of between two-and-a- half to three years. Counsel for Mr.

Isto submits that an appropriate disposition would be a sentence of incarceration for one year followed by a three-year probation order. [ 4 ] On the 30th of July, 2011, Mr. Isto was in a long-term common law relationship with Ms. Rikki Jago. Ms. Jago is the mother of M.H.J. who at the time of this incident was 11 years old. Mr. Isto and Ms. Jago had recently had an infant child as part of their ongoing relationship. Jessie Stokes is a friend of Rikki Jago. She is the mother H.U.S. At the time of the incident, H.U.S. was also 11 years old. [ 5 ] On the 30th of July, 2011, Ms.

Stokes and her daughter, H.U.S., came to Bowen Island to visit Mr. Isto and Ms. Jago. On the evening of the 30th of July, there was a community party at Bowen Island known as the dock party. It was agreed that Mr. Isto, Ms. Jago, and Ms. Stokes would go to the party. A babysitter was arranged. [ 6 ] While Mr. Isto and Ms. Jago were attending the dock party, they became grossly intoxicated by alcohol. The unusual conduct of Mr. Isto came to the attention of the police. At approximately 1:00 a.m. on the 31st of July, the babysitter came to collect Mr. Isto, Ms. Jago, and Ms. Stokes.

The children were placed in a minivan and driven from the Isto/Jago home to the dock party. [ 7 ] Mr. Isto got into the back bench seat of the van. H.U.S. was sitting next to Mr. Isto. The others, both adults and children, were randomly distributed through the minivan. The drive from the dock to the Isto/Jago home took approximately five to seven minutes. [ 8 ] It was during this trip that Mr. Isto began to sexually assault H.U.S. Mr. Isto began to rub the back of H.U.S. under her shirt. He began to touch her stomach. He moved his hands under her pants and began rubbing her inner thighs. H.U.S. tried to pull Mr.

Isto's hand away. He became angry. He made a fist gesture which H.U.S. interpreted as a threat. Mr. Isto then placed his hand under the underwear of H.U.S. and began to touch her vagina. H.U.S. began to struggle and told Mr. Isto to take his hand away. [ 9 ] H.U.S. attempted to touch her mother who was sitting ahead of her. Mr. Isto stopped her from doing this by pulling the arm of H.U.S. away. Mr. Isto continued to sexually assault H.U.S. by placing his hand under her shirt and fondling her breast. Mr. Isto took the hand of H.U.S. and placed it on top of his penis overtop of his pants. She pulled her hand away.

H.U.S., in order to protect herself from further assaults, curled away from Mr. Isto. At this point, he again clenched his fist in a threatening manner. [ 10 ] When the parties arrived back and the residence, H.U.S. ran to her mother. She was trembling and crying. H.U.S. told her mother in generalities what had occurred in the back seat of the minivan. H.U.S. slept with her mother that evening in order to be comforted. [ 11 ] Mr. Isto, once in the house, went to the bedroom of M.H.J. On entering the room, he began to sexually assault M.H.J.

He touched her breasts with his mouth and his hands, placed his hands upon her vagina, and inserted his finger into her vagina. He told M.H.J. not to tell anyone about what had occurred. [ 12 ] In the morning, Ms. Stokes asked Ms. Jago to drive her and H.U.S. to the ferry terminal. While at the ferry terminal, Ms. Stokes advised Ms. Jago what H.U.S. had said to her about the previous evening. Ms. Jago returned to her residence. She confronted Mr. Isto and then ordered him out of her home. [ 13 ] Ms. Jago then went to speak to M.H.J. At first, Ms.

Jago's daughter said nothing occurred and then began to make disclosure concerning the sexual assaults. [ 14 ] M.H.J. related as follows. The incidents had occurred for a period of approximately six months. Three to four weeks earlier, Mr. Isto had come into her bedroom and touched her breasts and vagina. He had penetrated her vagina with his finger. He made her touch his penis. M.H.J. related that on an earlier occasion, Mr. Isto had attempted to place his penis into her vagina. She fought and kicked at Mr. Isto in order to defend herself. M.H.J. related that there was no penetration, but the incident hurt her.

M.H.J. said that Mr. Isto had attempted to place his penis into her mouth, but she had resisted this. She related that on occasions, Mr. Isto had attempted to kiss her vagina. [ 15 ] After hearing this disclosures, Ms. Jago telephoned Mr. Isto. He admitted all of the incidents related by M.H.J. He advised Ms. Jago that the sexual assaults had been ongoing for six to eight months. [ 16 ] M.H.J. was taken to the Vancouver Children's Hospital. She underwent a sexual assault examination. No injuries were discovered. M.H.J. had to undergo the emotional upset and loss of dignity which are part of such examinations.

[ 17 ] I will deal at length with the consequences and the impact upon the two children. With respect to M.H.J., she was uprooted from her community in Bowen Island. She could no longer live with her mother there. She went to live with her father and her stepmother in another community. She found the questions put to her by the police very difficult to answer because of the emotional upset that was caused to her.

Both children have required a significant amount of counselling. [ 18 ] When considering the principles of sentencing, trial judges have been instructed both by the provisions of the Criminal Code and by the appellate courts. The Criminal Code of Canada in s. 718 requires judges to treat the principles of denunciation and deterrence as the primary considerations when dealing with offences against children. The Criminal Code further says that it is an aggravating factor where the children are under the age of 18 years of age or the offender is in a position of trust. [ 19 ] Here, Mr.

Isto was clearly in a position of trust with respect to M.H.J. who was living with him in the family unit. With respect to H.U.S., while she may not have been within the family unit, any time one parent entrusts the care of their children to another adult, that adult can be considered to be in a position of trust, in my view. [ 20 ] The victim impact statements have been filed. They are very moving. Ms. Jago and Ms. Stokes read to the Court the effect upon themselves and their children by the offences carried out by Mr. Isto. [ 21 ] I have had the opportunity of reviewing the presentence report prepared by Ms.

Infanti, a probation officer. Ms. Infanti confirms the impact upon the victims and their families as I have previously discussed. [ 22 ] Ms. Infanti noted that in her interviews with Mr. Isto, he took responsibility for his offences and expressed a significant amount of remorse. She found that he displayed a considerable amount of victim empathy. Ms. Infanti writes as follows: The factors that appear to have contributed to the offences include intimacy deficits, lack of general and sexual self-regulation, sex as a coping mechanism, problems forming intimate relationships, and substance abuse problems. [ 23 ] Ms.

Infanti outlined the programs which were available in correctional centres both when a sentence of two years less a day is imposed or a sentence greater than two years. I have taken into consideration the programs available under the two regimes. [ 24 ] I have also had the opportunity to review the report prepared by Dr. Kropp, a registered psychologist, and Ms. Alana Cook of the Forensic Psychiatric Services Commission. Dr. Kropp reports that Mr. Isto admitted to all of the allegations and that he understood the consequences of his actions. [ 25 ] Dr.

Kropp included in his report recommendations concerning the risk presented to the community by Mr. Isto of reoffending. Dr. Kropp writes as follows: It appears Mr. Isto was vulnerable to engage in these offences due to his confused sense of sexual boundaries which likely resulted in part from sexual abuse he suffered as a child. Other factors that contributed to the offences were Mr. Isto's excessive use of alcohol, his hypersensitivity to life stressors, and his preoccupation with sex in general. Mr.

Isto appears to fully accept responsibility for his crimes and he appeared genuinely remorseful for the pain and suffering he has caused the two girls. In considering the risk for future sexual violence, we consulted the Risk for Sexual Violence Protocol, a set of comprehensive guidelines for conducting risk of assessments of sexual offenders. It is our opinion that Mr. Isto represents a moderate risk for future opportunistic sexual offending. This offending would most likely occur against young female family members or young girls with whom he has unsupervised access.

Recent stress and substance abuse will contribute to his risk. Risk factors in this case include Mr. Isto's likely use of psychological coercion in the current offences, his history of being sexually abused, his problem with coping and stress, and his abuse of substances. However, it is encouraging that we found no evidence for a chronic and severe sexual violence history, no clear evidence of sexual deviance, and no evidence of psychopathic personality disorder or any other major mental illness. Further, Mr.

Isto accepts full responsibility for his behaviour, has stable employment, a relatively minor history of non-criminal offences, and is motivated and presumably able to fully participate and benefit from treatment. We do not believe that he is a significant risk for predatory sexual offences. [ 26 ] I have also considered the report of Randall Frost, the director of training and research for the Living Systems Program. Mr. Frost reports that Mr. Isto has voluntarily undertaken a series of counselling sessions and has attended a number of meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous. Mr.

Frost writes: During the counselling with me, he has been open, honest, and detailed in describing his sexual history. He repeatedly has expressed remorse, deep feelings of guilt and sorrow for the hurt he has caused the children. [ 27 ] Mr. Frost further reports: The last six months have been incredibly difficult for him, but he has been able to cope without trying to soothe himself with alcohol, drugs, or sex, reports he has learned it is important to talk with others when he is troubled, that it is equally important to listen.

He has begun to learn other ways of living and to develop new principles and behaviour that he can use to override intense feelings of unhappiness when they occur. [ 28 ] Mr. Frost concludes: Based on the work with Mr. Isto, I do not think he is likely to offend. He has been highly motivated and worked hard to understand and change his behaviour. [ 29 ] I also reviewed a letter from Paul Hughes who has been a sponsor of Mr. Isto in the Alcoholics Anonymous program since September of 2011. Mr. Hughes writes that Mr. Isto has been a willing participant in the Alcoholics Anonymous program and has attended regularly.

He reports that Mr. Isto has been open and forthright regarding the actions which led to his arrest. [ 30 ] Mr. Hughes includes as follows:

Regarding his recovery, it is also my opinion that a lengthy incarceration will be counterproductive for Daniel's progress. To be cut offfrom the support groups he attends and from the supportive contacts he has established will deter the path to recovery that Daniel hasbeen walking for the past several months. [31] Counsel for Mr. Isto filed a report setting out the meetings which Mr. Isto has attended since August of 2011. He has attendedalmost 300 meetings. They include Sex Addicts Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, and Alcoholics Anonymous.

In addition, he hasattended counselling sessions with a number of other organizations. [32] Crown counsel and counsel for Mr. Isto provided the Court with a number of authorities where other courts have considered theprinciples of sentencing to be applied in circumstances such as this. [33] The most recent case is R. v. G.S.M., 2011 BCPC 167. It is a decision of Her Honour Judge Baird Ellan of the Provincial Courtof British Columbia. In that case, Her Honour imposed a sentence of two-and-a-half years of imprisonment. The victims in that casewere a brother and sister aged seven and nine.

The accused was a surrogate grandparent to the children. The accused had fondled thefemale complainant's genitals and vagina. He had performed oral sex on both children. He made the female complainant fondle hispenis. He pled guilty to two counts of touching for a sexual purpose. [34] The accused was 67 years of age. He was a respected member of the community. He was steadily employed. There weremany reference letters in support of him. He had had a stable marriage. There was no criminal record. Dr.

Kropp's report indicated thatthe accused was a relatively low risk to reoffend. [35] However, it was pointed out that the accused had a remarkable lack of self-awareness and had told himself that the childrenwere not being hurt by what was being done; in fact, they seemed to be enjoying it. The aggravating factors are that he groomed thesechildren and indeed bribed them with gifts. Her Honour concluded that the range of sentence is between one and three years. [36] Her Honour considered the newly gained insight of the accused.

She said: As well, his newly gained insight after discovery of the offences and perhaps some counselling serves to reduce the future risk he maypose, but ... I do not see it as a mitigating [factor]. The individual personal betrayal of a family and wife similarly are not factors thatfigure into the process of sentencing. They occur in many of the comparable cases. Every case of this type involves a breach of trustand a position of authority. These, while statutory aggravating features, are common factors.

At paragraph 34 of her decision, she writes: ... the consequences to the offender of being caught, humiliated, and stigmatized ... are only natural consequences of the actions comingto light. [37] The issue of mitigation was also discussed by Her Honour. She referred to the accused's apparent trustworthiness and goodcharacter which merely disguised the risk he posed and enabled the offences to occur. She discussed the effect of a guilty plea whichprevents the Crown from having to call the victims to testify in open court.

Her Honour also described the mitigating factor of theaccused's willingness to undergo treatment. [38] At paragraph 39, Her Honour writes with respect to these mitigating factors as follows: In my view, the position of the Crown in this matter amply accounts for the mitigating factors. In particular, had the defendant not pledguilty, I would have imposed a sentence in excess of the upper range sought by the Crown. [39] Crown counsel also referred the Court to the case of R. v. R.S.H., 2005 BCSC 927. That is a decision of the HonourableMadam Justice Wedge of the Supreme Court.

The accused pled guilty to a charge of sexual assault and sexual interference with a childunder the age of 14 years. The victim was seven years old at the age of the trial and the assaults began when the child was four or fiveyears of age. [40] The accused was 62 years of age. He had no previous criminal record. He was of Métis heritage and steadily employed and wasin a long-term marriage. At paragraph 48, Judge Wedge wrote: The accused in this case argued that a mitigating factor is his previous good character, which is reflected in the fact that he has no priorcriminal record.

However, as noted by Romilly J. in R. v. C.L., [1998] B.C.J. No. 61, when sentencing an accused for sexual assault onchildren, previous good character is not to be considered a mitigating factor ... [41] Another decision of the Supreme Court of British Columbia which was drawn to the attention of the court was R. v. Goff, 2009BCSC 1627. The sentence imposed was 30 months incarceration. There were two young girls who were eight years of age who werethe subject of the sexual assaults. [42] The assaults occurred over a two to three-year period for a total of seven or eight occurrences.

The assaults consisted of digitalpenetration of one girl's vagina, fondling of her vagina, and placing her hand on his exposed penis. The accused was 41 years of age andhad no criminal record. [43] The case can be distinguished in that the sentence imposed was as a result of a joint submission by counsel. Both counsel forthe accused and Crown counsel submitted that a 30-month sentence was appropriate. [44] With respect to the principles of sentencing, the Court was referred to, firstly, the decision of R. v.

Stuckless, (ON CA), 127 C.C.C. (3d) 225, a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal delivered on August 10th, 1998. The facts in that case must bedistinguished from Mr. Isto's case. In the Stuckless case, there were predatory acts and grooming of the victims.

[45] The case is important for eloquently setting out the principles of sentencing. The relevant paragraphs are found at paragraphs42 to 44 of the decision. I will not quote them at length. However, there are some principles which must clearly be stated. Readingfrom paragraph 42: The absence of penetration does not automatically relegate the sexual abuse of children to the "lower range" of sexual offences. There isno question that "additional force", "collateral crimes", and penetration are aggravating factors.

But their absence does not therebytransform them into mitigating circumstances, nor neutralize the other aggravating factors found in this case: the abuse of trust, thenumber of victims, the frequency of the assaults and their devastating impact on the lives of the victims. These offences were,individually and collectively, unconscionable. Any characterization which purports to diminish their magnitude, is unacceptable. At paragraph 44, the Court wrote: Sexual abuse is

an act of violence. When committed against children, the violence is both physical and profoundly psychological. It iscoercive and exploitative conduct, and represents the use of compulsion against someone who is defenceless. [46] The Court was also referred to the decision R. v. D.(D.), (ON CA), 163 C.C.C. (3d) 471. It is a decision ofthe Ontario Court of Appeal delivered March 21st, 2002. Again, the circumstances must be distinguished from the circumstances of Mr.Isto's case. The R. v.

D.(D.) case referred to the principles set out in the Stuckless decision, but also provides further instruction to trialcourts. [47] At paragraph 34, the Court wrote: Adult sexual predators who would put the lives of innocent children at risk to satisfy their deviant sexual needs must know that they willpay a heavy price.

The objectives of sentencing commonly referred to as denunciation, general and specific deterrence, and the need toseparate offenders from society, must take precedence over the other recognized objectives of sentencing and these objectives must takeprecedence over the other recognized objectives of sentencing. [48] At paragraph 35, the Court wrote: We as a society owe it to our children to protect them from the harm caused by offenders like the appellant. Our children are at once ourmost valued and our most vulnerable assets.

Throughout their formative years, they are manifestly incapable of defending themselvesagainst predators like the appellant and as such, they make easy prey. People like the appellant know this only too well and they exploitit to achieve their selfish ends, heedless of the dire consequences that can and ... do follow. [49] At paragraph 45, the Court wrote: The appellant was prepared to risk the lives of innocent children to satisfy his sexual cravings. His conduct was reprehensible and it mustbe condemned in the strongest of terms.

The harm occasioned by the appellant and others like him is cause for grave concern. Childrenare robbed of their youth and innocence, families are often torn apart or rendered dysfunctional, lives are irretrievably damaged andsometimes permanently destroyed. Because of this, the message to such offenders must be clear – prey upon innocent children and youwill pay a heavy price! [50] I adopt without hesitation the principles of sentencing set out in those two cases. [51] The personal circumstances of Mr. Isto were described in the presentence report, the report of Dr. Kropp, and further amplifiedby counsel for Mr.

Isto. He is 41 years of age. He has been regularly employed in the construction industry. He is a skilledstonemason. He maintains his employment at this time. He enjoys the support of his friends and family. He is connected to his churchand attends regularly. [52] Counsel for Mr. Isto submits that there are exceptional mitigating factors in this case and a lack of aggravating factors. Counselfor Mr. Isto says that taking those factors into consideration, the appropriate sentence should be one year in jail followed by a three-yearterm of probation. [53] Counsel points to a number of mitigating factors.

Firstly, Mr. Isto has shown a significant insight into the factors which causedhim to offend. It is not always in situations such as this that an offender has the degree of insight held by Mr. Isto. [54] The second factor in mitigation is that Mr. Isto has expressed genuine empathy for the victims of his crimes. That has beenconfirmed by the presentence report, the letters from Mr. Hughes, and the letter from Mr. Frost. Counsel submits that the guilty pleashows genuine remorse and is a mitigating factor. [55] I cannot accept that as being a mitigating factor for the Court to take into consideration.

I have already reviewed the authoritieswhich discuss the effect of a guilty plea in cases such as this. It is true that the victims were spared the ordeal of having to testify. However, Mr. Isto made full confession of his offences to family, friends, and the authorities. [56] The next factor to be considered by the Court in mitigation is that Mr. Isto has undertaken significant rehabilitation efforts at hisown behest. I agree that Mr. Isto has attended many counselling sessions in the community.

Without meaning to denigrate thosecounselling opportunities, I find that the counselling programs available in both the provincial and federal institutions have much more tooffer than the community volunteer programs. [57] Counsel for Mr. Isto suggests that another mitigating factor is that there is an optimistic future for Mr. Isto. He has accepted hisresponsibility. He recognizes the effect of his actions upon his victims and he is enthusiastic to take further counselling. I agree thatthose are indeed factors which point to an optimistic future. [58] Counsel for Mr. Isto points to the report of Dr.

Kropp which speaks favourably of the underlying factors which caused Mr. Isto

to commit these offences. According to Dr. Kropp there is no evidence of chronic and severe sexual violence history, no clear history of sexual deviance, no evidence of a psychopathic personality disorder or other major mental illness. Dr. Kropp submits that he does not believe that Mr. Isto is a significant risk for predatory sexual offences. [ 59 ] I must balance that conclusion against Dr. Kropp's other conclusion concerning a risk for reoffending. He describes Mr. Isto as representing a moderate risk for future opportunistic sexual offending.

He writes that this offending would most likely occur against young female family members or young girls with whom Mr. Isto has unsupervised access. Those are circumstances which are foreseeable in Mr. Isto's future. [ 60 ] Counsel for Mr. Isto further points out that Mr. Isto has never accused his victims of in some way causing the incidents to occur or to what is frequently referred to as "leading him on." This shows insight into the offences as related by counsel and the letters in support. [ 61 ] Counsel for Mr. Isto referred to the Court to a number of decisions.

With respect to those decisions involving aboriginal offenders, I do not take those into consideration. The principles of sentencing aboriginal offenders are different than those to be taken into consideration when an individual is not of an aboriginal background. Those considerations have been set out in the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Gladue and in provisions of the Criminal Code . [ 62 ] In the case of R. v. V.W. , [2011] B.C.J. No. 1385 , Her Honour Judge Baird Ellan of the Provincial Court of British Columbia sentenced an offender who had entered a plea of guilty to a charge of sexual touching.

In that case, the Crown sought a sentence of 12 to 18 months imprisonment. The defence sought a sentence of 90 days to be served intermittently. Her Honour imposed a sentence of 12 months in jail followed by two years probation. I find that Her Honour imposed a sentence at the lower end of the range suggested by the Crown taking into consideration the circumstances of the offence and the circumstances of the offender. [ 63 ] In the case of R. v. Raymond , [2011] B.C.J.

No. 279 , a decision of His Honour Judge Hoy pronounced February 9, 2011, a sentence of six months imprisonment was imposed upon an offender who had pled guilty to a charge of sexual interference. The Crown in that case sought a sentence of six to nine months incarceration while the defence recommended a three to four-month sentence. It appears that His Honour accepted the Crown's submission at the lower end of the range put before the Court. [ 64 ] In the case of R. v. D.V.B. , [2010] B.C.J.

No. 2527 , a decision of His Honour Judge Hicks delivered October 25th, 2010, the Court imposed a sentence of one year in jail plus three years of probation. The Crown sought a global sentence of two years in prison. The accused was described as being a low risk to reoffend sexually. [ 65 ] In the case of R. v. N.V. , 2010 BCPC 404 , a decision of Her Honour Judge Baird Ellan delivered on October 22nd, 2010, the accused was sentenced to two years in prison followed by a three-month probation order. The facts are very aggravated. There were over 300 incidents of abuse by the grandparent of the children.

At the time of sentencing, the accused was 86 years of age. He was considered to be a very low risk of reoffending. Nevertheless, Her Honour imposed a sentence of imprisonment of two years. [ 66 ] Finally, in the case of R. v. P.A.T. , found at [2008] B.C.J. No. 1386 , His Honour Judge Woods of the Provincial Court of British Columbia imposed a sentence of 14 months in jail followed by three years of probation. The circumstances are distinguishable from those before the Court. The accused was described as being a moderate risk to reoffend. [ 67 ] The Crown sought a sentence of 12 to 18 months of incarceration.

The defence was seeking what was available at the time which was a conditional sentence to be served in the community. By imposing a sentence of 14 months in jail to be served in an incarceration situation, His Honour accepted the Crown's submission as to the appropriate range of sentence. [ 68 ] I have taken into consideration the principles of sentencing which I have outlined and the circumstances of the offence and the circumstances of this offender. I have come to the conclusion that the range of sentence suggested by the Crown is appropriate.

I take into consideration the mitigating factors pointed out by counsel for Mr. Isto and I will impose a sentence at the lower end of the range suggested by the Crown. [ 69 ] Stand up, Mr. Isto. [ 70 ] Mr. Isto, I sentence you to jail for a period of two-and-a-half years. [ 71 ] There will be a DNA warrant to be executed while Mr. Isto is in custody. [ 72 ] I will sign the necessary SOIRA documents. [ 73 ] There will be an order pursuant to the provisions of s. 109 of the Criminal Code prohibiting Mr.

Isto from owning, possessing, or acquiring any firearms, ammunition, or explosives and other items enumerated in s. 109 of the Criminal Code . The firearms prohibition is a period of 10 years. [ 74 ] I will make an order under s. 161 of the Criminal Code prohibiting Mr. Isto for a period of seven years from attending at areas frequented by young people or where young people can reasonably be expected to be attending, and I leave it to Mr.

Edwards to draft the appropriate terms of that specific Order. [ 75 ] Does the Crown wish to speak to the other outstanding counts in the Information or are there any other items that you want me to address? [ 76 ] MR. EDWARDS: Stay of proceedings on the outstanding matters, Your Honour. In reference to 161, and I think that is something that comes to the registry -- [ 77 ] THE CLERK: I do believe, Your Honour, that the registry does.

[ 78 ] MR. EDWARDS: Now, and just so we can perhaps clarify that, s. 161 , I did not mention this, unfortunately, has three subsections. Subsection (

a) is the one that relates to attending public parks, swimming areas, and other such locations; sub (

b) is seeking, obtaining, or continuing any employment; and then (

c) is using a computer system. I am only seeking prohibitions under s-s. (

a) and (b). I do not think (

c) is applicable and I so I think Your Honour -- if Your Honour makes the orders in regards to those subsections, the registry produces that and Madam Registrar is nodding. [ 79 ] THE COURT: Mr. Whysall, do you wish to make a comment with respect to that proposal? [ 80 ] MR. WHYSALL: No, no, thank you. [ 81 ] THE COURT: Thank you. Anything else, Mr. Edwards? [ 82 ] MR. EDWARDS: Nothing arising, thank you. [ 83 ] THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Mr. Whysall. [ 84 ] MR. EDWARDS: Sorry, DNA, Madam Registrar is asking, is primary designated. [ 85 ] THE COURT: Correct. [REASONS FOR SENTENCE CONCLUDED]