In sentencing for dishonesty offences, the actual extent of financial harm suffered by the victim at any given time (as distinct from the total amount misappropriated over the course of the offending) and the making of full restitution are significant mitigating factors that must be given proper weight, even where restitution is effected by a third party family member. A five-year head sentence for fraud as an employee involving misappropriation of approximately $151,000 (with full restitution and the victim deprived of only about a fifth of that sum at any given time) is within range but warrants a parole eligibility date at the 18-month mark rather than the two-year mark.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.