-14-
Sentencing in this case
40. As set out above, we have determined that the appropriate starting point for count 1 is 6½ years and that for count 2 is 8 years. We note the Defendant’s expressed remorse. If he had pleaded guilty, that would have been the greatest manifestation of such remorse and appropriate reduction in sentence would have been available to him. The Defendant, however, pleaded not guilty to the offences, which of course is his right, but he cannot now rely on the expressed remorse as a mitigating factor to ask for a reduction in sentence.
41. We also note that apart from the few minor traffic convictions, the Defendant was previously of good character and we would treat him as such in sentencing. However, in the face of serious offences as the two counts in this case, his good character is not of any mitigating value.
42. The court is sympathetic to the Defendant’s family members in respect of the predicament they may be in given that the Defendant was the main bread-winner and given the reportedly ill health of his mother and the advance age of his maternal grandmother. However, these are matters which the Defendant should have thought about before embarking on his criminal acts. They could not be any mitigating factors.
43. In the circumstances, we sentence the Defendant to 6½ years and 8 years respectively for counts 1 and 2. Although the two offences arose from the same set of facts, they are separate and
