Sex offender who posed as modelling agent argues in appeal he'll be lower risk as he gets older

Novid Stefano Dadmand is shown in a mugshot released by the RCMP in 2014.

Warning: Graphic content.

A British Columbia sex offenders who posed as a modelling agent, using "auditions" as a way to lure victims even after being charged, lost an appeal to change his sentence this month.

Novid Stefano Dadmand learned of the decision in a Vancouver courtroom Monday.

Dadmand was charged back in 2014, when he was 28, following allegations from Richmond, North Vancouver and Surrey.

CONVICTION IN 2016

He was found guilty of five of the six counts of sexual assault against him, each involving a different victim.

The court heard during his trial in 2016 that Dadmand deceived women in a modelling scheme. He acted as though he was an agent for a company called Jurgita, which does exist but has no presence in British Columbia, according to a summary of the trial. 

The Crown told the court the scheme was used to "induce (his victims) to engage in sexual activity with him," and that he used a fake profile on online dating sites to lure some of the women.

Dadmand used photos of an Australian male model and called himself "Brad," the prosecution said, noting the women he targeted did not consent, as they had been deceived and misled.

One of the victims told the court she'd been told by "Brad" that she'd be getting a $21,000 contract. She said she thought the arrangement was strange but she'd trusted Brad, after speaking to him on the phone regularly, and began meeting with Dadmand.

During one of those meetings, according to her testimony and video evidence, she was unconscious when the accused recorded video of her and initiated sexual intercourse.

The defence in his trial ceded that his actions "may have been immoral," as summarized by the trial judge, but "they did not contravene the Criminal Code because the complainants had consented to sexual acts with the accused."

In the case of the video, Dadmand's legal team claimed it was staged, created as a fetish video, and denied the victim's testimony that "This was not a shoot. I'm passed out."

The judge disagreed.

'DANGEROUS OFFENDER'

In the spring of 2018, six years after some of his crimes occurred and two years after his conviction, Dadmand was back in a B.C. courtroom for sentencing as the Crown argued to designate him as a dangerous offender.

In Canada, those given this designation can be sentenced to an indeterminate time behind bars, rather than a defined sentence.

It's a designation reserved for the most violent criminals. The Crown is asked to prove a person shows a pattern of behaviour, or behaviour so heinous in one instance, that they represent a threat to the safety of other persons. 

Essentially, they're high risk when it comes to reoffending because they're unable to restrain themselves, respect the consequences and impact of their behaviour or control their sexual impulses.

In Dadmand's case, the Crown said his behaviour shown in the assaults between 2012 and 2014 was "the product of his personality disorder and psychopathic traits, including his lack of empathy or any insight into his behaviour."

It asked for an indeterminate prison sentence, or a sentence of 10 to 12 years behind bars plus a long-term supervisory order for the decade after his release, meaning he'd continue to be monitored and live under a series of conditions during that time.

Among its reasons were that Dadmand continued to offend while out on bail, in the year between being charged and convicted. The Crown said he breached conditions prohibiting him from running his modelling scheme, noting that he'd pleaded guilty to an incident involving a model in 2015.

The court heard of another woman who had sex with Dadmand that same year, believing it was the only way to get a job as a dancer and "party girl" in a music video.

The defence argued against the designation, and asked for six years in prison, less time served, then three years under a long-term supervision order.

Again, the judge disagreed with Dadmand's legal team, and sided with Crown counsel's plan to designate him as a dangerous offender and put him in prison for an undefined period of time. 

His sentence included a lifetime ban on the possession of prohibited weapons and ammunition, and a 10-year ban on any non-prohibited weapons.

He also had to submit a "number of samples of bodily substances" so his DNA will be on file with authorities.

APPEALS

Last year, Dadmand fought back, taking his case to the provincial Court of Appeal.

He appealed his convictions on all five counts, challenging the "reasonableness" of a police search warrant.

During that appeal he fought for access to undisclosed evidence from complainants whose allegations were not heard in court, but that was denied, with a judge saying that had no impact on the challenge of the police search and that it was not required in his case.

He claimed the judge was wrong not to order that all materials found on his electronic devices be disclosed, and sought a new trial because of the impact it had on the fairness of the process.

His appeal was unsuccessful. The court found last spring that the judge did not err in deciding there was no possibility the non-disclosed information would have assisted the Dadmand's defence. 

This week, he was back in the same court with a different appeal.

Dadmand tried to argue against his sentence this time, saying he wouldn't challenge his designation as a dangerous offender, but took issue with an indeterminate prison sentence. 

In his latest appeal, he and his lawyer argued the judge failed to take into account all relevant principles of sentencing – such as rehabilitation and specific deterrence – and that he didn't "adequately" consider the opinion of an expert who thought he'd be lower risk as he got older.

But as in his other appearances, Dadmand failed to secure the verdict he'd hoped for.

The Court of Appeal judges said in their ruling they were "not persuaded" that the sentence was unreasonable.