Warning: This article contains details of child abuse

The father of the Granby girl who was killed due to abuse remains behind bars. The Parole Board refused not only to grant him parole but also day parole in a halfway house.

The 34-year-old will not be able to return to the board until November. The individual, whose identity cannot be revealed to protect another surviving child, was sentenced to four years in prison in January 2022 after pleading guilty to a confinement charge, bypassing three other charges, including criminal negligence causing death.


"The Commission finds that you are still unable to explain the violence you chose to use against your daughter," the decision, released Monday, read.

"You understand that the decisions you made at the time of the events were 'irrational' and unacceptable, but you are unable to go further in your reflection. The Commission believes it is essential that you further explore the origins of this violence,'" it continues.

The seven-year-old girl died in April 2019, the day after she was found by police officers completely wrapped in duct tape. The girl's father had initially restrained her that way after she had run away during the night to a neighbour's house. He then left for work in the morning. It was his wife, who was convicted of murder, who wrapped the child completely in tape, including over her face, because she had partially freed herself.


On the matter, the commissioners said, "you must try to understand why the next morning, when you were rested, and the victim was calm, you chose to leave her restraints on and go to work. You must understand how you were able to achieve such emotional detachment."

The board's decision goes against the recommendation of the case management team (CMT), which agreed with granting day parole in a halfway house. Most of the observations reported by the workers since he has been incarcerated have been positive. For example, on the psychological side, it was noted that the "risk of violent recidivism is assessed at a low-moderate level" and that this risk "appears to be manageable in the context of day parole." Also, his cooperation and motivation concerning interventions in the detention facility are acknowledged, as is the absence of a disciplinary report or security intervention.

"You acknowledge your responsibility for your actions. According to your CMT, your remorse and regret for the death of your daughter are sincere," it read.


Despite this, the Commission noted "the nature and seriousness of your offence, which is marked by great psychological and instrumental violence against a vulnerable person you should have protected. It is also worrying that this violence was carried out over a long period of time and that you could not stop or seek the help you clearly needed.

"It is also worrying that your partner, at the time of the incident, had already acted violently toward your daughter and that you continued to be wilfully blind to this for your own emotional need. Your responsibility for the tragic consequences is undeniable," it continued.


Moreover, this question of emotional dependence comes up a few times in the Commission's report, which recalls that at the time of the events, "you were well surrounded by professionals, but that your desire to look good prevented you from asking for the help you really needed, at the right time," the Commissioners point out, adding that the man had shown reluctance in the detention facility to change sectors "because you find change difficult and you find it difficult to leave the people you have known in this unit... The Commission sees this as a manifestation of your emotional dependence; again, because of insecurity and fear of being alone, you found it difficult to trust the assessment of those around you and make the logical decision."

The Commissioners describe this emotional dependency as a "significant risk": "You have not demonstrated that you have the tools to cope well. It is not enough to say that you do not want a partner, that you want to take care of yourself before you return to a relationship and that therefore you will not be at risk. The Commission believes that your prevention plan is magical thinking."

In its conclusion, the Commission was clear: "Thus, at this stage of your sentence, the Commission considers that it is not yet appropriate to allow you to return to society. You have not integrated all the required notions that could justify an early release. Therefore, you must continue your work of reflection and applying the tools in real time."

The girl's paternal grandmother appeared at the Commission's hearing to ask that her son not be released.