A 40-year-old Whitehorse man will be serving 60 days in jail after breaching his probation order.

Shane Donald Brazeau was in court Wednesday before Judge Heino Lilles.

Amy Steele, Brazeau’s lawyer, said her client was ready to be sentenced.

Crown prosecutor Sue Bogle said the three-year probation order was imposed on Brazeau on Oct. 31, 2016 due to a sexual assault conviction.

One of the conditions was to report to a supervisor and participate in a treatment program designed for sex offenders.

Bogle said Brazeau was assessed in late December 2016 to get him into a treatment program. He was placed in a program in the summer of 2017.

Brazeau’s reporting and attendance issues started early that year. Bogle pointed to several meetings or check-ins that were missed from March, April May, June and July of that year.

Bogle said on May 2, Brazeau was removed from the program because he’d missed too many sessions. She added that he still needed to report to his supervisor, but did not.

She said he would not have been in breach if he had tried to attend, adding illness was his reason for not attending.

Once he was in breach, a public interest warrant was issued for his arrest. Brazeau was arrested on March 10, 2018, spent two days in remand and was released. He was assigned a new bail and probation supervisor.

Bogle said nothing seems to have changed since release – he continued to miss meetings, claiming to be too sick to get out of bed. She did say he called his supervisor to inform that person of the issues.

Bogle said Brazeau maintains he was persecuted, and wrongfully accused and convicted of the sexual assault. She said he feels he does not need to follow the order.

Judge Lilles asked about the circumstances of the sexual assault, saying it is a broad term.

Not being familiar with the case, Bogle did not have many details, but said it was an assault against a person under age 16.

Steele agreed that her client failed to report, but said he wanted a trial on the matter because he’d tried to call in to report.

Lilles asked if phone reporting was allowed in the probation order, and Bogle said it must be in person.

She also stressed that Brazeau spent a significant period of time with no contact at all between his breach and arrest. Lilles called that an aggregating factor.

Bogle said probation officers find Brazeau hard to work with when they try to talk to him, and are unsure how to proceed from here. She said this is because he does not take responsibility for his crime.

The focus of probation orders is the protection of the public and rehabilitation, Bogle noted.

The hope is that through programming, offenders reform and do not commit further crimes. When the party under probation fails to report, it throws off the whole process.

“It’s a very serious condition (of probation),” she said.

Bogle felt the court needs to send a strong message that compliance is essential, and that a probation needs to be taken seriously and followed. Brazeau had been given the maximum probation length.

Bogle did acknowledge that he did have a knee injury, but that should not have prevented him from reporting nor participating in programming. Neither activity involved strenuous physical activity.

She felt jail was warranted, suggesting a 90-day sentence and serving the remainder of his probation after release.

“It’s now time for him to face up,” she said.

Steele said her client has been facing hardship due to the recent deaths of friends and family members. He also lost his job as a cook, forcing him to be on social assistance.

He also feels a lot of pain because of a degenerative issue in his knee which reduces his mobility, court was told.

Steele said this problem is further impacted by the fact that Brazeau lives in the McIntyre subdivision. He cannot afford transportation by bus or cab, she said, and he cannot walk long distances.

Steele agreed with Bogle in that a probation order needs to be respected, adding that Brazeau wants to participate in programming. She mentioned he had talked to a counsellor about a psychological assessment, and feels this could help him.

Lilles said it’s not uncommom to see an offender develop a renewed interest in programming as his or her court dates approach.

The judge asked if a court order could help Brazeau get the psychological assessment faster, an idea to which Brazeau seemed open.

As for the missed meetings and reporting, Steele said Brazeau did not feel he was a good fit with his probation supervisor. She did view this as an excuse, but wanted to provide some context. She did not ask that a new supervisor be assigned.

Steele argued for house arrest and a conditional sentence because of Brazeau’s knee problems and the difficulty of getting the medications he would need in jail.

She asked the judge to take these factors into account and give him effectively his last chance to follow probation.

Lilles said house arrest is a difficult order to follow. Brazeau said it would not be for him, because he barely leaves his residence. He also removed his cellphone from his pocket to show it to the judge.

Bogle expressed concern about Brazeau following the conditions of house arrest, considering he had disappeared before his arrest.

Bogle said Brazeau’s probation is set to expire in October 2019.

The judge commented that very little has been done in the first two years. He said he considered imposing a new order when he first heard the case, but now opposes that idea. Instead, he added a provision that Brazeau be psychologically assessed.

Lilles said the matter may not sound like the most important charge, but it is quite serious. Brazeau may have faced medical issues, the judge said, but he still failed to complete programming – a major part of his probation. He added that after missing several meetings, Brazeau fell off the radar until his arrest.

The judge said the knee problems are mitigating but Brazeau still refused to comply with probation and he did not turn himself in once in breach.

The judge noted that Brazeau has an extensive criminal record dating back decades. He sentenced Brazeau to spend 60 days in jail, and imposed a $200 victim fines surcharge.

Steele asked if the sentence could begin Aug. 1 because her client had made a commitment to housesit for the individual who is his surety.

Bogle said she was concerned about this because Brazeau has run away before.

Lilles ordered the sentence to begin immediately, but allowed Brazeau to be released June 26 to fulfill his commitment.

Brazeau will have to report back to jail on July 28 to finish his sentence. During his time out of jail, he will be subject to the same terms of his probation.