SELECTED CASE LAW
In 2012 ABCA 57, Mr. T pleaded guilty to making, possessing, and distributing child pornography, and sexually touching a child in order to make child pornography.
Mr. T had amassed an “extensively large” collection of child pornography – more than 16,000 images and movies – over a three-year time frame by trading images online. He also had vide-os and written stories he traded with other child pornography consumers. He also took photos of his friend’s son in the nude when the boy was between seven and nine years old, including an image where the boy’s penis was touching Mr. T’s. Mr. T shared those images online, along with the child’s name.
At trial, Mr. T was sentenced to six years in jail, two years for each offence, but the sentence for possession would be served at the same time as the other sentences so not to offend the totality principle. Additional orders included a DNA sample, forfeiture of the computer equipment, registration as a sex offender, and a lifetime ban on being near children.
The Crown appealed the sentenced.
The appeal court found that the trial judge had not explained why an eight-year sentence would offend the totality principle, and that Mr. T had a high moral blameworthiness, requiring a lengthy sentence. It found the trial judge made a mistake when misapplying the totality principle to reduce Mr. T’s sentence.
The appeal court increased the sentence to eight years and eight months in jail.