28-05-2025
B.C. man who lured ‘vulnerable student' has community sentence upgraded to jail
The B.C. Supreme Court is seen in New Westminster, B.C., Saturday, Dec. 9, 2006. (THE CANADIAN PRESS / Richard Lam)
A school support worker who sent sexually explicit messages to a 15-year-old student should serve his sentence behind bars, not in the community, a B.C. judge has ruled.
Gulbag Singh Hothi pleaded guilty to child luring last year and was initially handed a conditional sentence, which was appealed by Crown prosecutors.
In a decision published online this month, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Andrea Ormiston agreed that allowing Hothi to serve a community sentence was 'demonstrably unfit' given the circumstances of his crime.
'He had worked with vulnerable youth for years and would have recognized he was in a position of trust, responsibility, and power,' Ormiston said, in her April 25 reasons.
'He persisted in reprehensible efforts to orchestrate a contact-sexual-offence despite the victim rebuffing his advances and reminding him of her age.'
'Highly sexualized messages'
The court heard the victim was a 'vulnerable student' attending an alternative school for youths at risk of dropping out when she met Hothi in early 2023.
He was 27 years old at the time.
Hothi was completing his practicum for the Child and Youth Care Program at Douglas College, and was acting in the role of the victim's support worker. The two started messaging on SnapChat during the final week of his practicum.
'Shortly after this communication began, the respondent started sending the victim highly sexualized messages ranging from comments about her appearance to crude indications that he wanted to engage in sexual conduct,' Ormiston said.
Hothi also invited the victim for 'dinner and drinks' at his home, which she rejected by reminding him she was just 15.
The messaging continued after Hothi's practicum ended, and he eventually sent the victim an image of female genitalia that he claimed had come from another teenager who wanted to have sex with him.
The court heard the victim missed several days of school, fearing another encounter with Hothi, before eventually going to police.
Errors in original judgment
Prosecutors argued the trial judge made a number of errors while determining Hothi's sentence, and Ormiston agreed, finding the issues were 'palpable and overriding.'
Those errors included the way Hothi's position of authority was assessed as an aggravating factor.
While the trial judge accepted there was an 'aspect of breach of trust' in the case, the sentencing decision suggested it was diminished because Hothi was not the victim's teacher.
'I cannot discern a logical reason to find, from the perspective of the victim, that there would have been any difference between a teacher and an educational assistant when it comes to the exploitative nature of the crime and the increased accessibility the respondent had to her in a place where she should have felt safe,' Ormiston found.
The Crown also took issue with the trial judge's finding that the impact of Hothi's crime on the victim did not 'appear' to be long-lasting.
'Sexual offences against children cause significant harm that may take many years to manifest,' Ormiston wrote. 'The basis on which the court appears to distinguish the impact on this victim is not developed or supported by the record.'
A number of mitigating factors were considered as well, including that Hothi was a first-time offender, had pleaded guilty, and sought conselling following his arrest.
Ormiston found the length of Hothi's sentence was appropriate and gave him credit for the 7.5 months already served in the community, but ordered that he spend the remainder of his time behind bars.
Jail time is necessary to give 'substantive meaning to the court's recognition that this is harmful and wrongful offending,' Ormiston said.
