R. v. Campbell, 2015 ONCJ 384

Citation: R. v. Campbell , 2015 ONCJ 384 ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN v. PHILLIP CAMPBELL R E A S O N S F O R S E N T E N C E ********** BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE D.A.HARRIS Tuesday, February 24 th , 2015, at NORTH SPIRIT LAKE FIRST NATION TERRITORY, Ontario ********** INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROHIBITED FROM PUBLICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 486.4(2) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE APPEARANCES : Wm. Scutt Counsel for the Crown A. Seib Counsel for Mr. Campbell

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2015 THE COURT: Phillip Campbell has entered a guilty plea to a charge of sexual interference with a female. There is an order in place prohibiting publication of any information that might identify her, but her name is SB, and I mention the name because she will be named by her full name in the probation order. When Mr. Campbell was 18 years of age he and SB. They went to a home in Keewaywin. They were drinking. They started kissing. That led to further sexual activity which led to full intercourse which apparently occurred on a number of occasions.

At that time she indicated that she liked him. I do note that there was a victim impact statement that is before the court. There was also a pre-sentence report that has considerable comment with respect to the impact on the victim. It indicates that she has been undergoing many difficulties, whether solely as a result of this event or partly as a result of this offence and other aspects of her life. With respect to the victim impact statement itself, it has been a while since I have seen such a victim impact statement.

In answer to the question of, “Are there things you would like the judge to do that would help you feel safe?” It contains the reply, “Yeah, send him to jail.” So it was very clear that her attitude has changed. I will point out the fact that she says “Yeah, send him to jail” is not the motivating factor behind my decision to do just that. But it is certainly an indication of how far her attitude has changed upon reflection. The Criminal Code makes it such that 12 year olds are far from having the ability to consent to sexual activity with 18 year olds.

The Criminal Code makes it clear that when 18 year olds engage in sexual activity with 12 years olds, those 18 year olds are going to go to jail. The mandatory minimum sentence is one of 90

days imprisonment. Quite frankly I do not think that was ever intended to cover situations where there was full sexual intercourse. I am looking at a case where I am a balancing two things. If I sentence you on the basis of your offence Mr. Campbell you go to jail for closer to 18 months. If I sentence you on the basis of who you are, the joint submission is a very reasonable one. So I am taking into account the fact that you are 18 years of age. I am taking into account that you have only the one prior entry as a youth. I am taking into account the fact that there is nothing of this sort in your record.

Six months in jail is a long time, and I am taking that into account. I am taking into account the fact that you are a member of one of the First Nations and so I am giving full effect the

Section 718.2(

e) of the Criminal Code . I am also giving effect to the fact that this is a joint submission. I am somewhat torn when I get joint submissions that are for a range. But when a Crown says that “we are joining at six months”, unless I feel that other range is inappropriate, I should not be going much above the lower end of the range, and I will not be going much above it in this particular case. The sentence will be a follows: You will be sentenced to time-served, eight days pre-sentence custody credited as 12 days, plus imprisonment for a further six months.

That will be followed by probation for a period of one year. There will be a Sexual Offender Information Registration Act order for 10 years. I will get into that in a moment. I will also be making an order authorizing the taking of such bodily substances, including blood, as are necessary for forensic DNA analysis. This is not just a primary designated offence anymore. I believe with the latest rules it falls into the mandatory category. As I commented earlier, if it does not fall

into the mandatory order, I still feel that this is a very appropriate case for the order to be made. The terms of the probation will include the statutory terms; you will keep the peace and be of good behaviour; you will appear before the court when required to do so by the court; you will notify the court or the probation officer in advance of any change of name or address, and promptly notify the court or the probation officer of any change in employment or occupation; you will report in person to a probation officer....

Can he do that immediately when I have sentenced him to jail or does he have to do it following the completion of his jail term? UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: It will be following. We do a release plan. THE COURT: Okay.

You will report within two working days of your release from custody, and after that at all times and places as directed by the probation officer or any person authorized by a probation officer to assist in your supervision; you will cooperate with your probation officer; you must sign any releases necessary to permit the probation officer to monitor your compliance and you must provide proof of compliance with any condition of this order to your probation officer on request; do not contact or communicate in any way, either directly or in-directly, by any physical, electronic or other means with SB; do not be within 20 metres of any place where you know her to live, work, go to school, frequent or any place you know her to be.

There will be no exceptions. Do not attend at the First Nation Territory of Keewaywin or Cat Lake. There are no exceptions. I am not going to include a term with respect to abstention from alcohol. I do not feel that it is appropriate in this particular case. That does not mean I am suggesting to you that you should feel free to go out and drink to excess. I think you should

be looking at whether or not, if your drinking is getting you into trouble, it might get you back into jail. Do not do it. I am going to leave that up to you. Counselling and treatment, you will attend and actively participate in all assessment, counselling, or rehabilitative programs as directed by the probation officer and complete them to the satisfaction of the probation officer for – and I am going to go strictly to other and put in - as directed by the probation officer. I am going to leave it up to him or her to determine what is necessary. We will use the “in addition”

section to cover, you will not be in the physical presence of any female under the age of 16 unless also in the presence of a sober and responsible adult. As indicated I am making an order pursuant to

section 490.012 of the Criminal Code that you comply with the provisions of the Sex Offender Information Registration Act for 10 years. And I am going to give you four months following your release to pay the surcharge. Have we covered everything counsel? MR. SCUTT: I believe so Your Honour. MR. SEIB: I believe so Your Honour. MR. SCUTT: Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Do you understand the terms of the probation and the Sex Offender Information Registration Act order sir? MR. CAMPBELL: Yes I do. THE COURT: Can you live up to them? MR. CAMPBELL: Yes.

THE COURT: Do you understand that if you breach the terms of either order you can be charged with a criminal offence? Is that a yes? MR. CAMPBELL: Yes, that’s a yes. THE COURT: We are recording everything. Thank you counsel. MR. SCUTT: Thank you. The second count can be withdrawn

please. THE COURT: The other count will be endorsed withdrawn at the request of the Crown. MR. SCUTT: Thank you. COURTROOM CLERK: Your Honour, the DNA is a primary designated offence I believe? THE COURT: You can put it down as a primary designated offence. COURTROOM CLERK: Thank you. ********** PHOTOSTAT COPIES OF THIS TRANSCRIPT ARE NOT CERTIFIED AND HAVE NOT BEEN PAID FOR UNLESS THEY BEAR THE ORIGINAL SIGNATURE OF LORI D. SUMMERS.

Transcript Ordered: .......February 26, 2015.. Transcript Completed: .....March 8, 2015... Ordering Party Notified: ..March 9, 2015... FORM 2 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIPT (SUBSECTION 5(2)) Evidence Act I, Lori Summers, certify that this document is a true and accurate transcript of the recording of R. v. P. Campbell in the OCJ COURT held at NORTH SPIRIT LAKE FNT, Ontario taken from Recording No. 1511-PORT1-20150224-140237-6-HARRISDAV which has been certified on Form 1.

March 8, 2015 .................................... Lori Summers