L'absence de remords du contrevenant et l'appréciation de sa dangerosité future

R. v. Walker, 2021 ONCA 863

Lien vers la décision

[3]         Regarding the first ground of appeal, the trial judge found in her reasons for sentence that the fact that there was “no sign that [the appellant] has any insight into the seriousness of the offences” was an aggravating factor. The appellant relies on R. v. Reeve, 2020 ONCA 381, 151 O.R. (3d) 65, for the proposition that a lack of remorse cannot be treated as an aggravating factor because to do so would come very close to punishing the offender for making full answer and defence.

[4]         In our view, this case is distinguishable from Reeve. First, the issue in the present case was a lack of insight and not a lack of remorse. In addition, in the case at bar, the thrust of the defence submission was that the appellant posed a low risk to re-offend and that a conditional sentence was fit in the circumstances. In considering that argument and the issue of future dangerousness, it was open to the trial judge to consider that the appellant did not appear to understand the seriousness of the offences: R. v. Hawley, 2016 ONCA 143, at para. 5, R. v. Shah, 2017 ONCA 872, at para. 8. Consequently, we do not give effect to this ground of appeal.