SELECTED CASE LAW
In 2018 BCCA 81, Mr. G was charged with sexual exploitation, sexual interference, sexual assault, distribution of pornography, and invitation to sexual touching.
He committed these offences against his niece’s son, Mr. J, between 1997 and 2008, and against Mr. J’s friend, Mr. D, between 2004 and 2006.
Mr. G acted as a grandparent to Mr. J, who referred to him as “grandpa”. Mr. G cared for him in his home regularly, feeding and clothing him. Mr. J was between 4 and 16 years old at the time of the offences, which included Mr. G masturbating Mr. J, performing fellatio on Mr. J, possibly procuring prostitutes for Mr. J, taking sexually explicit photos of Mr. J, transmitting these photos to Mr. J, along with other pornographic material, by email, and sent Mr. J sexually explicit messages by email. Mr. G also sexually assaulted Mr. D during family powwow outings.
Mr. G was convicted of sexual interference, sexual exploitation, distribution of child pornography, and sexual assault causing bodily harm. He was acquitted on one count of sexual interference and one count of invitation to sexual touching. He was sentenced to 12 years’ incarceration. One count of sexual assault was stayed under the Kienapple principle.
The appeal court allowed “transmission” of child pornography to one individual to qualify under the “distribution” provision.
See also: 2016 BCPC 157 (Evidentiary Hearing).