Michael Madden was serving an intermittent sentence. Madden, undeterred by this sentence, re-offended in relation to the same victim. At sentencing the judge held that "specific deterrence was an overwhelming consideration". Due to this consideration, De Filippis J jumped a joint position and rejected the apparent reliance on the guilty plea as sufficient mitigation to support the joint position.
The Court of Appeal agreed - 2012 ONCA 247: "Saving the victim from having to testify was an important consideration but it could not justify the sentence that was proposed in this case" [para 1].