Probation and Child Pornography Offences
In R. v. Inksetter , the Court of Appeal for Ontario has signalled that while probation may be a component of a sentence for a child pornography offence, probation (even a relatively onerous probation) is very unlikely to reduce what is generally required by imprisonment to satisfy the primary sentencing objectives of deterrence and denunciation. See R. v. Inksetter , 2018 ONCA 474, at para. 20. Denunciation and general deterrence are the primary principles of sentencing for offences involving child pornography: R. v. D.G.F. , 2010 ONCA 27 (CanLII), 98 O.R. (3d) 241 , at paras. 21-22 , 30; R. v. Nisbet , 2011 ONCA 26 (CanLII), [2011] O.J. No. 101 , at para. 3 ; R. v. E.O. , 2003 CanLII 2017 (ON CA), [2003] O.J. No. 563 , at para. 7 ; R. v. Stroempl , 1995 CanLII 2283 (ON CA), [1995] O.J. No. 2772 , at para. 9 . Probation has traditionally been viewed as a rehabilitative sentencing tool. It does not seek to serve the need for denunciation or general deterrence. R. v. ...