Warning: This story contains disturbing details of a sexual assault.
A Nanaimo man in his 30s has been sentenced to three years in prison for violently sexually assaulting a teenager he had just met.
Curtis Nielsen’s conduct was “unconscionable” when he ignored the girl’s “pleas in his apparent pursuit of his own gratification,” B.C. Supreme Court Justice Jan Brongers said in a sentencing decision released this week.
“Mr. Nielsen’s conduct must be denounced, and he must be deterred from engaging in such callous behaviour in the future,” Brongers said.
Nielsen, who was 30 at the time, met the 17-year-old in the designated smoking area of his apartment complex on June 20, 2021. The girl, whose identity is protected by a publication ban, was working as an overnight nanny in the complex and had stepped outside to smoke after the child she was caring for went to sleep.
Nielsen was alone in the smoking area when the teen arrived and the two struck up a conversation.
Nielsen asked if he could kiss the girl. She agreed and they kissed, according to Brongers’ decision.
The two then walked to a nearby shed that housed the building’s dumpsters, where Nielsen kissed the girl more aggressively and began to choke her, pull her hair and push her to her knees.
He forced the girl to perform oral sex to the point she had difficulty breathing.
She began to cry and went limp, feeling helpless, while Nielsen told her to “shut up” and “take it like a good girl,” Brongers said in his decision.
When Nielsen was finished, the two walked back to the apartment complex, where he kissed her before they parted and asked when he would see her next.
The teen returned to her employer’s apartment and immediately showered, noticing that her skin was stinging, her neck and jawline were sore and she was bleeding from her anus.
She went to a hospital shortly after the assault and received medical attention for her physical injuries.
Now 21, she described in a written victim impact statement the emotional, physical and financial impact Nielsen’s assault has had on her.
She has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, has frequent anxiety attacks in public and experiences borderline personality disorder episodes, making it difficult for her to make and maintain emotional and physical connections with her partner, family and friends, she wrote.
Sexual intimacy can trigger her to go into shock and her physical injury has yet to heal three and a half years later, she said.
She said she was unable to return to her nanny job because it would mean returning to the scene of the assault, and she did not work at all for four months. She also had to pay for therapy to deal with the trauma from the assault.
Brongers found Nielsen guilty of the sexual assault in July. He was sentenced in late January to three years in prison and required to be registered as a sex offender for 20 years.
He is banned from having contact with the woman for the duration of his sentence.
The Crown suggested a sentence of between three and three and a half years, while Nielsen’s lawyer proposed a sentence of just under two years to be served in the community, with three years of probation to follow.
Brongers considered Nielsen’s upbringing when determining his sentence, including the fact that he was molested by a babysitter when he was five.
He was diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. As a teenager, he spent time in a government facility for treatment because he inappropriately touched his eight-year-old sister.
The judge did not find the sexual abuse he suffered as a child or his mental-health issues to be mitigating factors, however, because no evidence was given to explain the link between his experiences and his crime.
Among several aggravating factors was the “highly intrusive” nature of the sexual assault involving unwanted anal penetration, the victim’s young age and Nielsen’s attempt to silence her during the attack, Brongers said.
Brongers noted that Nielsen declined to address the court when given a chance and takes no responsibility for the harm he has caused the woman.
He maintains the interaction was consensual and not aggressive.
