O.J. No. 2970, 2010 ONCA 488, 213 C.R.R. (2d) 291, 96 M.V.R. (5th) 1,
265 O.A.C. 158, 257 C.C.C. (3d) 261, 77 C.R. (6th) 134, 89 W.C.B. (2d) 473;
R. v. Saikaley (2017), 135 O.R. (3d) 641,  O.J. No. 2377, 2017 ONCA 374,
348 C.C.C. (3d) 290, 139 W.C.B. (2d) 34; R. v. Shah,  O.J. No. 6141, 2017
ONCA 872; R. v. Snook,  N.B.J. No. 334, 2013 NBPC 17, 411 N.B.R. (2d)
305, 110 W.C.B. (2d) 81
Statutes referred to
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, ss. 718.01, 718.1 [as am.], 718.2(a)( ii.1), ( iii),
( iii.1), (c), 718.3(7)
Tougher Penalties for Child Predators Act, S.C. 2015, c. 23
APPEAL by the accused from the sentence imposed on June 10,
2016 by J.D.D. Evans J. of the Ontario Court of Justice.
Brian A. Callender, for appellant.
John A. Neander, for respondent.
The judgment of the court was delivered by
 STRATHY C.J.O.: — The appellant was convicted of sexually
abusing his three nieces (six-month-old twins and a four-year-
old), filming the abuse and distributing the photographs and
movies on an Internet site devoted to the sexual abuse of chil-
dren. He was also convicted of possession of child pornography.
His collection included images and films of sadistic sexual abuse
and sexual degradation of very young children.
 The appellant appeals his sentence of 18 years (less 18
months’ credit for pre-trial custody) on his convictions after
guilty pleas to counts of making child pornography, distributing
child pornography, possessing child pornography, sexual assault
with a weapon and three counts of sexual interference. The relevant offences and sentences are summarized in Appendix A.
 For the reasons that follow, I would dismiss the appeal. The
sentence imposed, while lengthy, is entitled to deference. The sentencing judge identified the relevant principles and applied them
correctly. The sentence is not demonstrably unfit.
 I begin with a caution. It is unfortunately necessary to
describe the offences and the circumstances surrounding them in
a degree of detail that is graphic and disturbing, in order to have
a full appreciation of the nature and gravity of the appellant’s
 In 2015, the Child Sexual Exploitation Unit of the Ontario
Provincial Police (“OPP”), working in conjunction with the Royal