Many shocked by low sentence for rapist, while co-accused appeals as victim, not offender in ongoing case

On Tuesday December 20th 2016, the sentencing of Antonio Comunale marked the end of a trial which heard the disgusting account of the repeated rape and sexual assault of two separate female minors on several occasions.


Co-accused Caroline Budd was sentenced in September, but has since appealed the conviction, and is currently free after being granted bail. Mental health and youth advocates are pleading with the court to reevaluate her sentence partly due to her fragile emotional state and vulnerability.

In recent years, there has been no shortage of high profile sexual assault cases. As we heard details of shocking and heinous acts of trusted community members, some of the  convicted had held great standing in communities, in our culture and national heritage, all across Canada, affecting many innocent lives, and prompting criticism of what the public says is far too lenient sentencing for sexual offenders, a definite lack of minimum sentences, minimizing the impact of these crimes on the victims, and the compulsions which drive predatory sexual abuse.

Many would point out that this case is a prime example of the criminal justice system showing said leniency. Many in the local community are outraged that Antonio had received only 30 months in prison, when the maximum for sexual assault involving a minor is 14 years. In comparison, currently in Canada, a first time offender charged and convicted with trafficking marijuana is subject to be sentenced to a maximum of five years, double the typical sentence for convicted rapists with no criminal history and low risk of re-offending.

In a previous article also published by Ottawa Citizen this past September advocated considering the female offenders mental state, described as "having the mental age of a 13 year old", and that she herself was a victim, not only of the co-accused, but of a lifetime of many hardships, abusive boyfriends, and unfortunate circumstances. Defense attorneys had explained she was tricked, manipulated, and threatened into remaining in an unhealthy relationship with Antonio, who forced her into unwillingly participate in the crimes she's been convicted of.

Most can at least understand this argument, although it morally it's difficult to do so, but we know that victims of abuse are subjected to severe trauma, sometimes resulting in unusual and irrational behaviors, can become co-dependant, justify their own abuse, defend their abuser, all while remaining in the abusive relationship, refusing to leave regardless of the consequences or their own best interests. While certainly unhealthy and abnormal, this is so frequently an issue, that many laws specify circumstances which call for varying degrees of accountability and consequences. Similary, we assess our peers when we ask, "Well, could you blame [him/her/them] for doing it?". Some unique factors and details which can justify, excuse, or clarify an action its motivation.

All arguments considered, it's a stretch to imagine how any reasonable person could remain completely silent after witnessing such heinous, disgusting behavior and not call someone's attention to it. All extraordinary circumstances and considerations aside, it seems as if for her entire life up until she met the co-convicted, she's managed to participate and function independently in society, just the same as any random person you might encounter in public. It can be easily agreed, except in some rare cases, that society as a whole, and each of it's members, knows that their actions have consequences, that certain actions are against the law, that breaking the law is wrong, and because it is wrong, those who break the a in substantially unfavorable and detrimental consequences.

Both arguments considered, it's evident that Caroline at least desperately needs long term admission to an in-patient treatment program in a mental health facility. If she truly lacks the capacity to refrain from becoming an unwilling participant of violent crime, admission should be permanent. Although few defendants have been proven to truly lack the capacity to interpret their own actions as either right or wrong, this typically results in their permanent removal from society and the general public.

Going forward, it's blatantly obvious that an open dialogue is needed between lawmakers, advocates, and citizens, data should be collected and analyzed and decisions will need to be made, and soon at that. Canada has had a history of disproportionately sentencing convicted rapists to excessive prison time, which likely resulted in overshooting the new legislation to make up for the error of the old legislation. At least we can look at splitting the difference, because while the law doesn't have to make everyone happy, it does need to be fair for everyone, and as unfair as that can sound, fairness and equality are pillars which hold the criminal justice system at the high standard it currently sits at.