Father gets seven year prison sentence for assaulting baby

By Alejandra Pulido-Guzman - Lethbridge Herald on August 5, 2023.

LETHBRIDGE HERALDapulido@lethbridgeherald.com

A father who repeatedly assaulted his baby was sentenced to seven years in prison Friday after the judge reviewed the recommendation of the Crown prosecutor and his lawyer.
 The father, who can’t be named to protect the identity of the baby girl, pleaded guilty on June 23 in Lethbridge court of justice to charges of aggravated assault and failure to provide the necessaries of life.
Taking time served into consideration, the man will serve just over six years in prison which will be spent at the Bowden Institution at Innisfail. He is also prohibited from owning a firearm for life.
 Prior to reading her decision, Justice Kristen Ailsby reminded everyone present about the publication ban and said she had chosen not to say the child’s name throughout the decision.
 “This is not because her identity has changed or her name doesn’t matter to me, rather is my way to demonstrating the degree of vigilance required to preserve and protect the publication ban and its intend. So for today I will simply describe the victim as baby girl,” said Ailsby.
 She said the latest update from the baby girl’s medical team is that minor health events, such as a low-grade fever or a mild cold, push her into medical distress which require emergency transport and lengthy hospital stays.
 “So at this time the only thing we truly know about baby girl’s future is that she has a loving caregiver ensuring her needs are met, and a competent medical team engaged in her care,” said Ailsby.
 Since the now eight-month-old baby girl is too young to prepare her own victim impact statement. Her foster mother prepared one and it was entered as an exhibit in the sentencing hearing.
 Ailsby said in that statement the foster mother describes the intense care required for the child because of her fragile brain and body, how vigilant she must always be to respond to baby girl’s seizures and how the multiple appointments and treatments, which take place in both their home and throughout their large city, are exhausting and it compromises the time the foster mother would otherwise invest in a home-base business.
 Ailsby said that at the onset of the sentencing hearing counsel advised her that together with each other, they believed the appropriate sentence for (the father) is a period of incarceration of seven years.
 During the sentencing hearing, counsel also explained that the maximum sentence under the criminal code for the offence of failing to provide the necessaries of life is five years in jail. Therefore the Crown proposed the sentence of five years on the count of necessaries of life and seven years on the count of aggravated assault, to be served concurrently with each other.
“The task before me today is to decide if the proposed sentence of seven years is the right result. I’ll cut to the chase – I have chosen not to depart from counsel’s joint submission. I’m satisfied that the proposed sentence of seven years is fit and proper,” said Ailsby.
 Before explaining why she had confidence in the proposed sentence, Ailsby said she wanted to review three essential factors the community needs to reflect upon as it considers the sentencing result.

 “First, I want to compare the initial charges to the ones being resolved today. The charges laid against (the father) have attracted a great deal of attention, not only in our small little city here on the Canadian Prairies, but in places throughout the entire world,” said Ailsby.
 She said allegations that a wee, fragile baby could be sexually assaulted by her father when she was but a few weeks old, grabbed the public’s attention like a choke hold and twisted the public’s consciousness of disbelief, outrage and demands for justice.
 She added that the allegations alone pushed the community into collective shock and undermined people’s basic trust in parents and said that it was against that backdrop, that she wished to remind all participants of an important procedural event that took place at the last court appearance.
 “The Crown unequivocally withdrew its application of sexual assault and sexual interference as against (the father). Ms. Kendall confirmed there was no medical evidence to support the allegation that (the father) interfered with his daughter in any kind of sexual manner. Therefore, (the father’s) guilt is confined to two non-sexual offences: his failure to provide for his daughter and aggravated assault upon her,” said Ailsby.
 She said the sentence confirmed Friday has no relationship to the original allegations that he initially sexually abused his daughter.
 “The second point I wish to explore relates to motive. When children, especially innocent and fragile children are hurt by adults, the public focus turns to motive. Engaged and curious members of the public desperate for answers want to know what would ever motivate a person to ever hurt a child, especially the kind of hurt that (the father) engaged in,” said Ailsby.  
 She said the court shared that curiosity as understanding an offender’s motive enables judges to craft sentences, which not only take into account the underlying causes of criminality but also assist in rehabilitation.
 “When I asked (the father) at our first hearing if there was anything he wished he could say before I passed sentence upon him, he explained ‘I thought about this a great deal for the last couple of months, and I am having a hard time myself coming up with any explainable position that would justify my actions in this case.’ In other words (the father), the person closest to the criminality, the person who caused the harm can’t even explained why he hurt his daughter,” said Ailsby.
 Lethbridge lawyer Darcy Shurtz told the court during the sentencing hearing that his client was raised in 19 foster homes beginning when he was five years old when he was taken from his home because his parents were not competent caregivers.
 He said his client was physically abused growing up and suffers from dementia and bipolar disorder and other ailments. He also indicated his client went through electroshock therapy 10 or 12 years ago and has suffered with the effects of that throughout his life.
 “As a sentencing judge I am required to consider the exceptional adverse experiences that (the father) has had throughout his life,” said Ailsby.
 She said his motive for committing violent offences against his daughter, is not that he had an exceptionally difficult life, his personal adversities do not explain why he chose to hurt his daughter.
 “He knows, as do we, that he is unequivocally responsible for causing lifelong pain and devastating injuries to baby girl. However, his personal antecedents shed light on his moral capability and they serve as a reminder to our entire community that believe that when we fail to protect vulnerable children, like (the father) once was, when we fail to resource our children with the most basic fundamental needs, when we fail to respect and appreciate what children are and need, we can and will experience deep and further hurts,” said Ailsby.
 For her third and last essential factor the community needs to reflect upon as it considers the sentencing result, she praised the actions of the roommate who disclosed the violence baby girl was enduring and said that without his decision to disclose the violence which was happening to the child in his own home, the girl would have likely died.
 “As the community navigates the collective grief and loss for baby girl, I’m hoping it can find comfort and hope in the role (the roommate) played in these events,” said Ailsby.
 She then explained why she agreed with the proposed sentencing and explained that even though a joint submission allows offenders to receive a sentence which may be more lenient than they could otherwise expect following a trial conviction, it provides a measure of control and certainty as of the outcome.
 Ailsby said that during the first hearing, the Crown disclosed to the court the litigation risks had (the father)’s matter proceeded to trial.
 “As the Crown addressed and assessed its likelihood of conviction before trial, the Crown recognized it may not have been able to meet its evidentiary rule of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Had that happened, (the father) may have been acquitted entirely and walked away a free man,” said Ailsby.  
 The mother who had also pleaded guilty in June to one count of failing to provide the necessaries of life, will be back in court on Aug. 18 to allow time for the preparation of a pre-sentence report. The report will provide the court with the woman’s personal circumstances and background to help determine a fit sentence.
 The Crown and defence are also expected to jointly recommend a sentence when that matter returns to court.
 -with files from Delon Shurtz

Follow @APulidoHerald on Twitter

5
-4

Comments are closed.