Utterly disgusting. What UNNAMED DAD did to this child. And the wagging-finger sentence that the courts gave him. Was there a mother in this home? Sure doesn't sound like it.
INVISIBLE MOTHER ALERT
http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3451547
Dad jailed two months for sex abuse
By RON GRECH, QMI AGENCY
Updated 9 hours ago
TIMMINS -- A 61-year-old man tearfully apologized to his daughter in a Timmins court Wednesday after admitting he had sexually abused her as a child.
The victim was 11 years old at the time.
The man was sentenced to two months in jail, six months of house arrest and two years of probation after pleading guilty in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Timmins to invitation to sexual touching, indecent exposure and voyeurism.
The subject of the father's voyeurism was a young friend of his daughter who stayed at the house for a sleepover.
The offences occurred over a period of a few months in 1990 when the family lived in the West Nipissing area.
The family moved to Timmins not long after those offenses occurred.
The daughter's victim impact statement was read aloud to the court.
"A father is someone who is supposed to protect" their child from abuse.
Instead, "innocence was taken from me" by her own father. "I trusted that person and loved that person with all my heart."
The daughter said she kept this secret for 20 years. Throughout that time, it haunt her and she suffered nightmares as a result.
In 2010, she notified the Timmins Police Service and filed a complaint against her father.
The court imposed a publication ban protecting the identity of the father since it would indirectly lead to the identity of the primary victim.
Assistant Crown Attorney Dale Cox said the trouble started when the daughter arrived home from school one day, entered the bathroom and caught her father masturbating.
Defence lawyer Ted Tichinoff described it as "purely bad luck that she walked in while he was" pleasuring himself.
Cox said, "That was the start of similar activities happening in her presence."
There were further incidents where he exposed and stimulated himself in front of his daughter.
The prosecutor cited another occasion where the father encouraged his young daughter to watch pornographic videos with him.
He then "directed her to disrobe" and "touch her vaginal area."
The voyeurism charge stems from a single incident involving a nine-year-old female friend of the daughter.
Cox said the two girls were sleeping in the same bed during a sleepover when the father came into the room in the middle of the night and woke up the young guest.
He told her the family cat she had been handling was sick and she needed to thoroughly wash herself.
Cox said the girl "was certainly old enough to wash herself." However, the father insisted that he remain in the bathroom as the girl disrobed, "with her genitals in full view," and watched as she cleaned herself.
Judge Robert Riopelle said this sleepover should have been a happy memory for the two girls.
Instead, "that event is so badly scarred by something" the offending father "did in another huge breach of trust."
Riopelle said under the circumstances, he could easily justify imposing a jail term of 12 months.
However, the judge accepted the joint recommendation of the prosecution and defence attorneys and handed down a lighter sentence of 60 days in jail followed by six months of house arrest.
The accused will be permitted to serve his 60-day jail term on weekends in order to retain his job.
The defence lawyer, Tichinoff, said the accused is not in very good health and he is very frightened of going to jail.
"This 60-day sentence (of real jail time) speaks loud and clear."
Tichinoff further justified the sentence by saying the incident occurred over a "relatively brief period," the offender has no criminal record and he has been undergoing psychological counselling.
Prosecuting attorney Cox said one of the mitigating factors for him was that "right from the get-go" when police arrested the father, he admitted to his offense and expressed concern about putting his daughter through any more pain.
The court heard he gave up his right to a preliminary hearing because he said he didn't want to put his daughter through the ordeal of being called to the stand and testifying against him.
The two years of probation begins right away since the father is serving an intermittent sentence.
Throughout that period, he is prohibited from having any contact with his daughter unless she agrees to amend the order.
The court also made an order that the father's name be added to the national sex offenders registry.