Content warning: Intimate Partner Violence

This case is about balancing different sentencing considerations when both the offender and survivor of intimate partner violence are Indigenous.  

LEAF is intervening before the Supreme Court of Canada. 

FACTS

Harry Cope, an Indigenous man, pleaded guilty to the aggravated assault of his intimate partner, Brittney Sack, who is also Indigenous. He breached conditions to not contact Ms. Sack twice while on release pending trial.  

Before the sentencing decision, Mr. Cope requested and participated in a sentencing circle with support from the Mi’kmaw Legal Support Network. The circle involved community members, the Crown, the judge, and Mr. Cope. Ms. Sack did not participate in the sentencing circle and did not submit a victim impact statement. 

Mr. Cope requested a Conditional Sentence Order to access a treatment facility, then long-term secure housing with culturally relevant supports. The sentencing circle recommended he be subject to three years of community supervision and not serve additional time. The Crown recommended a five to six-year sentence for the aggravated assault, plus a sentence of time served for breaching conditions. The sentencing judge sentenced Mr. Cope to five years in prison for the aggravated assault and eight months in prison for the breaches, reasoning that a custodial sentence was necessary to protect society. Mr. Cope appealed the decision.  

The majority of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal found that the sentencing judge erred by not giving enough consideration to Mr. Cope’s mental illness and addictions, plus their connection to his Gladue factors, and found that a proportionate sentence would have a shorter period of incarceration and then robust community supervision, as informed by the sentencing circle recommendations and his Gladue report. In contrast, the dissent held that the sentencing judge did not err in principle and found that the majority failed to give sufficient weight to the statutory amendments directed at protecting Indigenous women and intimate partners from violence. Mr. Cope appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.  

ARGUMENTS

LEAF will argue that an approach to sentencing informed by the lived realities of Indigenous survivors of violence must recognize that incarceration has not improved their safety.  

Prison contributes to recidivism, particularly for Indigenous offenders who experience intergenerational trauma, and does not address the root causes of violent behaviour. Instead, culturally relevant and effective Indigenous sentencing recommendations—such as ones from the sentencing circle—can achieve sentencing objectives identified in the Criminal Code while advancing the constitutional imperatives of reconciliation and substantive equality rights of Indigenous women.  

OUTCOME

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in this case on December 5, 2025.  

Read LEAF’s factum here.

LEAF is grateful to Alisa Lombard and Virginia Lomax, counsel in this case.  

LEAF’s interventions are also guided by a case committee with expertise in issues relevant to the intervention. LEAF is grateful for the case committee members who supported this intervention, including Gillian Bourke, Theresa Donkor, Karen Drake, and Naiomi Metallic.