Sineku man sentenced to 26 months in prison for indecent assault on 18-year-old

A 69-year-old Sineku man who has been described as a cultural icon, devoted Christian and family man, is now imprisoned for the next two years following his conviction of indecent assault.

Frank Joseph Laurent was originally charged with rape and indecent assault. However, on January 25, 2023, following a trial by jury, Laurent was acquitted of rape, but convicted of the lesser charge.

The fact of the case is that Laurent and the Virtual Complainant (VC) were neighbours. He was 64 years old at the time of the incident whilst the VC was 18.

On September 18, 2018, the victim was home alone. She testified that after getting out of the shower, she heard her dogs barking. Wrapped in a towel, she looked out her window where she saw Laurent standing outside her house.

The VC told the court that she then went to the door and Laurent asked her if her mother had any dasheen for sale.

After her reply, Laurent pulled the door open, entered the house and pushed the complainant onto the bed. She tried to get up, but he pushed her down and pulled her bath towel while she tried to hold it in place.

According to her, Laurent had his hand on her chest which caused difficulty in her breathing. He subsequently touched her breasts, her bottom and her vagina which last for about three to four minutes, following which he left and returned to his residence.

After the incident, the VC recollected that she felt “sad and depressed.” She told her boyfriend with whom she was living at the time and a few days later reported the assault to her mother and the police.

Laurent who was subsequently arrested on October 4, 2018, admitted that he had gone to the VC’s home but denied the allegation.

Based on the Social Inquiry Report submitted to the court, the VC who is now 22 years old, said she was surprised and hurt by the behavior of the defendant and said the assault has had a lasting impact on her.

The report said the victim lives in fear for her safety, especially as she alleges that she has been the subject of threats from a relative of the defendant. The incident has tarnished her reputation and affected her relationships with others.

The crime of indecent assault carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.

In her written submission to the court, State prosecutor, Daina Matthew who led the matter, told the court, based on the serious psychological harm and trauma caused to the VC, an appropriate sentence of four years less time spent on remand, would become a sentence of three years 10 months and would be fitting for the convicted man.

She noted that Laurent was a neighbour and friend who abused his position of trust and suggested that the court consider the matter to be exceptional and high in consequence and seriousness when applying the sentencing guidelines.

By way of aggravating factors, Matthew urged the court to consider the fact that the defendant has shown no remorse and continues to assert his innocence. However, Justice Richard Floyd averred that remorse is not an enumerated aggravating factor in the sentencing guidelines section pertaining to the offender.

“While genuine remorse is a mitigating factor, the lack of remorse and as an aggravating factor at best, it is neutral,” he said.

In his oral submission to the court, attorney-at-law Joshua Francis who represented Laurent, along with Julien Prevost, pleaded with the court for a noncustodial sentence for his client as he recommended a suspended sentence and time served as the appropriate disposition in this case.

According to Francis, Laurent achieved the age of 69 without generating any criminal record.

Relying on the Social Inquiry Report, Francis posited that Laurent, a father of 8 who has been married for 35 years, is of good character.

In his attempts to further sway the court, Francis added that his client has many skills and abilities; he is an educated man, a cultural icon in the Kalinago Territory and across Dominica, a skilled sportsman, active in the game of cricket and now serves a cricket empire and commentator, Francis disclosed.

The defense attorney went on to note that Laurent who has been a “devoted” Christian for 14 years, cooperated fully with the police during their investigation.

With reference to the sentencing guidelines, Francis said there is no evidence by way of medical reports or otherwise, that indicates that the complainant suffered psychological or physical harm to any degree. He further urged the court to disregard the references in the Social Inquiry Report from the complainant, that she was the subject of threats from the defendant after the incident, and more recently, by a relative of the defendant because no confirmation of that by way of the police report for otherwise was provided.

In conclusion, Francis stated that such a short sharp period of incarceration of 60 days was a sufficient sentence, as, according to the attorney, when released, Laurent will rely upon the strength and assistance of his church community to help him with any rehabilitation that he may require.

Nevertheless, in handing down his sentence, while Justice Floyd pointed out that the crime of indecent assault carries a maximum sentence of 5 years imprisonment, he noted that sentencing involves many considerations in order to achieve the appropriate penalty.

“This was a crime of sexual violence, perpetrated by a much older male upon a young adult female in her own home. The sexual integrity of the complainant was grossly violated,” the Judge stated.

He continued, “When a person commits a sexual offense, the act is an indignity to the victim’s person, both physically and mentally. It leaves a stain that cannot ever be removed.”

The presiding Judge noted that while indecent assault is largely a non-penetrative sexual offense, it is no less despicable on that account.

“Although indecent assault is less serious than rape, the latter carrying a greater penalty, it does not make indecent assault any less traumatic to the victim.”

In crafting the sentence, the court relied upon the general provisions of Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court sentencing guidelines for sexual offences, reissued in November 2021.

To establish the starting point for the offense within the relevant range, the court first considered the consequence by assessing the harm caused by the offense.

Justice Floyd stated significant force was used by the defendant in the course of the offense resulting in serious and ongoing psychological harm caused to the complainant. The court, therefore, found that the appropriate classification to be in category two, high.

At stage two, in considering the seriousness by assessing the culpability of the offender, Justice Floyd contended that the fact that Laurent made contact with the genitals of the VC, used physical violence, forced uninvited entry into the complainant’s home, and a significant disparity in age between the defendant and the complainant of 46 years, “this leads to a determination of the appropriate category to be level A, high.”

In this case, the court determined the appropriate starting point to be 45% – or 27 months imprisonment.

Having established a starting point of 27 months, the court then considered the aggravating and mitigating factors of the offense and adjust the sentence upwards or downwards as necessary. Justice Floyd said he found no aggravating or mitigating factor which has not already been considered and implemented.

The court was then left to consider the aggravating and mitigating factors pertaining to the offender and adjust the figure within that range.

The court also found no aggravating factor against Laurent but a mitigating factor which was considered, was his “good character” and the fact that he had no previous conviction.

However, the presiding judge opined that good character is a less relevant consideration for serious offenses with aggravating factors of which this case is one.

“The defendant pushed his way into the young complainant’s home while she was alone and touched her in an inappropriate and sexual manner. The behaviour was reprehensible, and the complainant continues to suffer from the emotional effects,” he asserted.

He said consideration for Laurent’s “good character” will only afford him a one-month reduction in his sentence which then stood at 26 months.

No credit was available to the convict for a guilty plea, as this was a conviction after trial.

At the final stage of the sentencing however, full credit was given to Laurent for his time spent on remand which was a total of two months which reduced the sentence to 24 months.

“Allow that time to contemplate, Sir, your behavior in this case and I trust that you will come out at the other end a better person,” Justice Floyd advised the indecent assault convict, Frank Joseph Laurent.