Sexual assault victim names stepfather

Editor's note: On March 29. 2020, Dennis Clement Rivet was granted a pardon on his conviction under the Criminal Records Act. Mr. Rivet was eligible for a pardon because enough time had passed since his conviction under the legislation for him to apply. The Parole Board of Canada, in granting the pardon, noted Mr. Rivet has "remained free of any conviction since completing the sentence and was of good conduct." As a result of the pardon, his name will no longer appear on the provincial Sex Offender Registry. His name will remain on the national registry for seven years.

The mother of a victim of sexual assault sat at her husband’s side and wept as he was sentenced to one year in prison for sexually assaulting her daughter.

Dennis Rivet, 41, of Coniston, returned to Sudbury court Monday afternoon to be handed down a sentence after pleading guilty to the charges.

The sexual assault was alleged to have taken place over a ten-year period from the time Rivet’s stepdaughter was five years old. At 15, the girl, who is now 19, moved out of the home her mother shared with Rivet. In September 2005, the girl reported the incidents to her mother and charges were laid. Rivet acknowledged his involvement, pleaded guilty to the charges and offered an apology to his stepdaughter. And though Superior Court Justice Robert del Frate said the apology seemed sincere and Rivet had expressed genuine remorse, it wasn’t enough to justify the impact the girl has felt.

The conduct continues to have an impact years later, del Frate said. The stepdaughter continues to face the effects of the assault - emotional devastation, an eating disorder and other medical problems, as well as a loss of contact with her mother and siblings, the Justice recounted.

“Sexual abuse is an act of violence against children and the effects on this victim are profound,” he said.

“Incarceration is necessary. The message must be clear to Rivet and others.”

Following his prison term, Rivet will be on two years probation with a set of conditions set out by the Crown, which prevents him from being in the presence of children under 18, unless accompanied by another adult, among other  conditions. He also must register with the Sexual Offenders Information Registration Act for 20 years upon his release from jail and supply a DNA sample at the earliest opportunity.

Publication bans are usually imposed by the court in cases involving sexual assault to protect the identity of the victim, which incorporates restrictions on the publication of the name of the accused to avoid association.  However, the victim in this case asked for no such protection so the name of her stepfather would be published.

She said she came forward for the sake of her siblings. And though she is relieved it’s over, and satisfied with the sentence, she said the fact it was over hadn’t quite hit her yet. “It’s a new beginning,” she said, as tears streaked down her face.

John Luczak, acting director of Crown Operations for the North Region, said he could count on one hand the number of people who have asked for a publication ban to be lifted in his 20 years of experience in the Crown office.

“It’s not very common,” he said. “The whole point of the section is to protect people from publicity, otherwise they might not come forward.”

Though he could not categorize whether the benefits of lifting a publication ban outweighed the ramifications, Luczak said a possible reason for a person to deny the protection of a publication ban was to bring public attention to one’s particular case.