MANDEL: Appeal court sentences Ontario rapist to prison — but won't send him there
· Toronto Sun
See more Toronto Sun on Google — save as a Preferred Source
A mentor convicted of sexually assaulting a university student and threatening to send sex videos to her family in Iran has been sentenced to three years in prison after Ontario’s highest court overturned his light conditional sentence.
Visit sportbet.rodeo for more information.
But lucky Yasser Ghoreishi won’t actually have to do any time behind bars after all.
The Court of Appeal ruled the 20-month conditional sentence imposed in 2024 for sexual assault and assault was “demonstrably unfit” for such a serious offence but didn’t want to send him to prison now that he’s completed his conditional sentence.
“In the circumstances, it is not in the interests of justice that he be reincarcerated. This court is generally reluctant to reincarcerate an offender who has already served the sentence originally imposed,” wrote Justice Darla Wilson on behalf of the three-judge panel.
“Imprisoning Mr. Ghoreishi at this point would merely serve to disrupt his employment and housing and hinder his rehabilitation.”
What a horrible message that sends.
After coming from Iran in hopes of attending Laurentian University, the complainant was connected to Ghoreishi, a Laurentian post-graduate student and an Iranian national, through a family friend. He became a mentor to her and advised her to come to Sudbury for a few days to check out the university. On her last night there, she said he forced her into sexual intercourse and videotaped the encounter.
She stayed in contact with him and they agreed to forget about what happened.
In March 2020, Ghoreishi, introduced her to a suitor identified only as S.M. but continued to demand sex from her under threat that he’d divulge the sex tape he recorded in Sudbury. When she tried to leave the room, she said he hit her hand and on another occasion, slapped her during sex.
Threatened to ‘crush’ victim and suitor
After the third and final incident in May 2020, the complainant and S.M. decided to cut the controlling Ghoreishi out of their lives and in return, he threatened to “crush” them. A few months later, S.M.’s friend received an anonymous letter accusing the complainant of lying about her virginity and threatening to send naked photos and videos. The friend gave the letter to S.M., who confronted his girlfriend. She finally disclosed that Ghoreishi had been blackmailing her into sex.
She then reported him to the police.
At his trial, Ghoreishi claimed it was all consensual. Originally charged with four counts of sex assault, two of assault and one of unlawful confinement, a jury convicted him only on one count of sexual assault and one of assault. The Crown asked for a three- to four-year prison term; Superior Court Justice Rita Jean Maxwell sentenced him to a 20-month sentence to be served at home.
On appeal, the court upheld Ghoreishi’s convictions but agreed with prosecutors that he should have gone to prison, with the usual range being three to five years for sexual assault involving penetration.
“Conditional sentences will rarely be appropriate in these cases,” Wilson wrote.
“Mr. Ghoreishi’s offences are serious. The jury’s verdict reflects that the appellant was found to have threatened the complainant, forcing her to have sex with him under duress, while also assaulting her. Mr. Ghoreishi took advantage of the complainant’s vulnerability as a new immigrant to Canada and betrayed the trust she had placed in him for his own sexual gratification. As reflected in her victim impact statement, and accepted by the trial judge, the offences had a significant impact on the complainant, leading her to be fearful and distrustful of physical contact and to harbour insecurities about her relationship with her now-husband, S.M.”
The court substituted a three-year sentence and then promptly stayed it.
“In this case, the principles of denunciation and deterrence may be adequately addressed through allowing the sentence appeal, denouncing the sentence originally imposed, substituting the sentence that ought to have been imposed, but staying execution of that sentence.”
But how in the world is letting him off the hook adequate denunciation?