Analysis of Canadian Judges' Sentencing Circumstances in Online Child Pornography Cases

• In Event: Poster Session

Abstract

Sentencing is a process that has experienced many changes since the mid-20th century. Aggravating and mitigating circumstances related to the offence and the accused influence the sentence during the trial. The inclusion of legal considerations is also necessary in the evaluation of the sentence. It appears interesting to discuss the sentencing of an offence that has been through several transformations to analyze and understand more deeply the factors that compose it. One offence that has increased significantly in the last decade is child pornography (CP).
The purpose of this study is to understand the decision-making process of judges in CP cases in Canada, based on an analysis of legal and criminal circumstances on which they rely. The sample consists of 173 written judgments mentioning the sentences imposed by judges at trial for CP offences committed between 1999 and 2019. The various analyses conducted show some increase in the severity of imprisonment sentences over the years. Despite the addition of a mandatory minimum sentence in 2012, the results suggest that certain aggravating circumstances mentioned during the trial influence the severity of the punishment. This study provides the first assessment of the circumstances affecting the sentencing of child pornography offenders in Canada.

Authors

• Arianne Mignault, Université de Montréal

• Francis Fortin, Université de Montréal