Fred Church will serve an 18-month conditional sentence as punishment for three sex crimes involving two14-year-old boys and a 13-year-old girl.
Church, 70, was formerly a well-known businessman and volunteer for many charities. He lives with his wife in Halfmoon Bay.
During his sentencing hearing in B.C. Supreme Court Nov. 12, Church apologized to his victims.
"My lawyer has expressed my regret to the families and to these students," he said. "This was a very foolish mistake on my part. The consequences have changed the lives of a lot of people."
The crimes, sexual assault, sexual touching by a person in a position of trust or authority and sexual touching of a person under 14 years, all took place at Church's Halfmoon Bay home in 2002. Although the incidents happened on different occasions, the circumstances of each case were similar: after bringing the child to his home, Church invited them into his hot tub, provided alcohol and, in one case, smoked a joint with his victim, then offered a foot massage. Church's pretext was that he was practising reflexology, but then he progressed from massage to sexual acts. In passing sentence, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Peter Fraser described the crimes as "the amateurish sexual fumblings of a troubled man" and noted that they did not involve violence.
"They were always tentative in the sense that Church would withdraw as soon as the victim resisted," said Fraser. "While they are at the lower end of sexual crimes, they deserve punishment Prior to the conditional sentence regime, I might have been inclined to sentence Mr. Church to three months in jail."
Instead of jail, Fraser sentenced Church to a conditional sentence of 18 months, to be served at home. During that time, he cannot be in the company of anyone under 16 without another adult being present, he can have no contact with the victims, and he must obey a curfew from 11 p.m. to 9 a.m.
"While the public may not understand it conditional sentences are often tougher than time in custody. They last longer and involve severe restrictions on personal freedom," said Fraser.
Crown prosecutor Crichton Pike asked Justice Fraser to order Church to take sex offender treatment as required by his conditional sentence supervisor. A forensic psychiatric report on Church described him as "a relatively low risk for re-offending," but added he "is in considerable denial about his sexuality" and recommended he be permitted no contact with adolescents of either sex. The report also recommended Church "be referred for assessment for suitability for sex offender treatment."
Fraser at first was reluctant to order the sex offender counselling, saying it was unnecessary because of Church's age and his voluntary "hermit-like" life since 2002, when he was first charged with eight sex crimes involving young teens.
"If you have a 40-year-old man, of course you want to send him to a sex offender treatment program," said the judge. "What we have here is a 70-year-old man."
Pike interrupted the judge to interject, "who finally got caught."
Pike later apologized and withdrew that comment, which he said was "flippant." But he stood by his argument that Church should be evaluated by an expert to determine whether sex offender treatment is necessary in his case.
"Mr. Church's chances of re-offending are the same as any sexual offender: quite good, if he is not kept an eye on," said Pike. "It's our job in the criminal justice system to make sure it doesn't happen again."
Justice Fraser agreed to order that Church be evaluated for treatment, though he still questioned whether such treatment would "have any virtue with respect to the community and the safety of children."
