Despite a joint submission of one year in jail and 18 months probation, a Chilliwack provincial court judge sentenced Andrew Mullaly to 18 months jail and three years probation for the ongoing sexual assault of a girl between the ages of 11 and 16. (Facebook)

B.C. judge defies lawyers and adds six months to man’s sex assault sentence

‘I find the joint submission is contrary to the public interest and I’m rejecting it’

A man convicted of sexually and emotionally abusing a teenaged girl for years was handed a sentence 50 per cent longer than requested in a joint submission by Crown and defence in a rare decision by a provincial court judge.

Andrew Mullaly elicited no emotion in courtroom 203 at the Chilliwack Law Courts on June 21 as Judge Andrea Ormiston sentenced him to 18 months jail followed by three years probation, the maximum allowed under the charge conviction.

Crown counsel Grant Lindsey and Mullaly’s lawyer Darrel Schultz had put forth a joint submission in April for one year in jail followed by 18 months probation.

Judge Ormiston decided that sentence for Mullaly who committed as many as two dozen acts of “sexual humiliation” on the girl between the ages of 11 and 16 was “not only unfit but one that is contrary to the public interest.”

In rejecting the joint submission, the judge pointed to a Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decision that said joint submissions should not be rejected unless that sentence would be contrary to the public interest. In R v Anthony Cook, a decision delivered by Justice Michael Moldaver of the SCC, it was made clear that a joint submission should not be rejected lightly.

“Joint submissions promote the smooth operation of the criminal justice system,” Moldaver wrote. “The appellant gave up his right to a trial and any self-defence argument he may have had. In the end, the trial judge’s deviation from the recommended custodial sentence — by only six months — amounts to little more than tinkering.”

In Canadian law, judges are not bound by joint submissions, however, the courts are generally reluctant to divert from what is proposed by both Crown or defence assuming there is case law showing similar sentences for similar crimes.

Ormiston decided, however, that in this case the submission was indeed not in the public interest.

“I find that under the specific circumstances of this plea agreement, one year cannot be reconciled with the principles and ranges established in the authorities,” she said.

“I find the joint submission is contrary to the public interest and I’m rejecting it.”

Mullaly was charged with sexual assault, extortion and possession of child pornography for ongoing abuse of the girl from the time she was 11 until 16. The multi-year abuse and humiliation began with emotional “punishment” that expanded to repeated instances of sexual touching and sexual assault.

During the brief hearing on April 12, Lindsey read parts of a victim impact statement from the girl, in which she said she felt “used, manipulated, hopeless, ashamed.”

• READ MORE: Judge questions joint submission for Chilliwack man who sexually assaulted girl

It was then in court that Judge Ormiston first raised the spectre of rejecting the joint submission, based on her concerns about the serious nature of the facts, the brevity with which case law was presented, and the rushed nature of the hearing late on a Friday afternoon.

As part of the plea agreement, Crown proceeded summarily rather than by indictment, which meant the conviction to which he pleaded is substantially less serious than if it were to be heard in BC Supreme Court.

As the sentence was read out and he was taken away by a sheriff to jail, Mullaly expressed no emotion.

Another wrinkle in the case occurred after the April sentencing hearing when local Crown counsel — ordered by the provincial Public Prosecution Service — applied to extend the standard publication ban name on the identity of the victim to include Mullaly’s name.

• READ MORE: OPINION: When observation affects what is observed

The application, unsurprisingly supported by Mullaly, was left undecided upon between April and the June 20 appearance. In the interim, Judge Ormiston asked Crown to ask the victim her perspective on extending the publication ban to Mullaly.

“They are not concerned with the mentioning of his name in the newspaper,” Lindsey said in court on June 20.

Ormiston then explained how the singular concern of the court is of the privacy of the victim. She pointed to the fact that the Crown was not seeking a remedy for past instances when Mullaly’s name was used, and no evidence of a publication ban violation was presented in court.

“Today I have the added evidence that the victim does not share the Crown’s concerns,” she said, adding that there was nothing presented to her to explain why Mullaly’s name should not appear in print.

“I simply cannot make that finding on the specific evidence that has been heard here in court.”

She left the original publication ban on any information that could identify the victim in place, thereby leaving the onus on the media to not reveal her identity.


@PeeJayAitch
paul.henderson@theprogress.com

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Just Posted

GOWN UP to raise $10m for Surrey Memorial Hospital upgrades

The money will be used to upgrade 10 operating rooms, buy cutting-edge equipment and recruit more top-notch surgeons

Lord Tweedsmuir downs Seaquam in high school football

The Panthers improve to 3-1, move into a tie for second in the Eastern Conference

Canucks’ Diwali Night game gives Surrey’s Heer the thrill of DJ-ing for his favourite team

‘It should be a good game with (Alexander) Ovechkin in town’ on Oct. 25, says Jovan Heer

UPDATED: British couple vacationing in Vancouver detained in US after ‘accidentally’ crossing border

CBP claims individuals were denied travel authorization, crossing was deliberate

‘A monumental step’: Surrey Food Bank finds new, much larger home in Newton

The charity is expected to make the move next summer

ELECTION 2019: Climate strikes push environment to top of mind for federal leaders

Black Press Media presents a three-part series on three big election issues

Advanced polls see 29 per cent increase in voter turn out from 2015

Some 4.7 million people took part, says Elections Canada

Cheating husband sues mistress for gifted ring after wife learns about affair

The husband gave his mistress $1,000 to buy herself a ring in December 2017

Pot use admission at U.S. border snagging Canadian boomers, says lawyer

A waiver to enter the U.S. can cost $2,000 and isn’t a guarantee

Health concerns over vaping cast haze over Canadian cannabis market expansion

More than 1,000 people in the United States, and a handful in Canada, have developed a lung ailment

After losing two baby boys, B.C. parents hope to cut through the taboo of infant death

Oct. 15 is Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Day in B.C.

B.C. massage therapist reprimanded, fined for exposing patients’ breasts

Registered massage therapist admits professional misconduct

B.C. boosts legal aid funding in new payment contract

‘Duty counsel’ service restored in some communities, David Eby says

Rugby Canada helps recovery efforts in Japan after typhoon cancels final match

Canadian players wanted to “give back in whatever small way they could”

Most Read