Cases for Child Pornography
2023
R. v. J.N.
What happens when your online order is not actually what you ordered? J.N. ordered a sex doll online, the company sent a child-sex doll. The order was stopped at border patrol, and J.N. was charged with importing child pornography. Celine provided all the information to the Crown to show that the shipped item was not what was ordered, and the charges were dropped.
2022
R. v. P.C.
Police were warned that P.C. had child pornography on his computer. The Crown prosecutor wanted a 1-year jail sentence; but Celine was able to convince a judge to sentence her client to 90 days jail, served on weekends. P.C. was able to keep his job and return home during the week.
2020
R. v. J.M.
JM had an enormous collection of child pornography, downloaded from the internet, and available to others through a peer-to-peer software. JM was a first time offender. The Crown wanted JM to be sentenced to 5-6 years of jail, but Celine convinced the judge that a much lower sentence, that of 3.5 years, was appropriate.
2014
R. v. J.H.
J.H. was charged with possession of child pornography. According to the police, J.H.’s collection was one of the largest they had ever seen. The day before J.H. was sentenced, someone else with a smaller collection of child pornography was sentenced to 2 years in jail. Céline worked with J.H. to ensure that he was on the road towards rehabilitation, and she successfully argued that all of J.H.’s hard work towards rehabilitation should afford him a lesser sentence. J.H. was sentenced to 1 year in jail, for possession of one of the largest collections of child pornography in the Ottawa-area.