The consequences of criminal conduct may be taken into account in sentencing, but the three judges were divided on whether unforeseeable consequences are relevant: Underwood J held all consequences are relevant (with reduced weight for unforeseeable ones), while Crawford J and Zeeman J held that consequences too remote or not reasonably foreseeable should not be taken into account. A plea of guilty entered solely in recognition of the inevitability of conviction warrants little or no mitigatory weight. Actual community outrage is not a relevant sentencing consideration; the court must instead assess the outrage that an informed and responsible public would feel. The question of whether unforeseeable consequences may be taken into account in sentencing remains unresolved as between the three judges.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 37 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 37 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.