Admitted child abductor Randall Hopley made the bogeyman real, a judge said Thursday as she ordered a psychiatric assessment for the man.
B.C. Supreme Court Judge Heather Holmes ordered a 60-day assessment to determine whether Hopley should be labelled as a dangerous or long-term offender. Hopley abducted three-year-old Kienan Hebert from his home in Sparwood last September, only to return him unharmed several days later. Holmes said Kienan and his family appear to have moved on from the ordeal, but she said the impact of Hopley's crimes could have been far worse.
"In my view, common experience tells us there's nothing more frightening to parents than to lose a child," Holmes told a courtroom in Cranbrook."Mr. Hopley made the bogeyman real in their home. It seems like victims of such an event will never feel safe in their home again."
The judge noted the Hebert family decided not to file a victim impact statement.
"Mr. Hopley was lucky in his choice of victims," said Holmes. "The family was able to cope and move forward."
Hopley, who is now 47, pleaded guilty to breaking into the Hebert's home in the middle of the night last September before taking the boy to a cabin at a nearby bible camp. Kienan was returned to his home four days after he was taken. Hopley was later arrested at the camp.
Hopley has insisted he never harmed or sexually assaulted the boy, and the Crown has presented no evidence that he did.
However, Crown prosecutor Lynal Doerksen pointed out during a sentencing hearing last month that Hopley has a criminal history, including a sexual assault on a five-year-old boy in 1985 and an attempted abduction in 2007.
But Hopley's lawyer told the hearing that a dangerous offender designation was too extreme.
"We don't have any violence, any maltreatment or any threats of violence," William Thorne said during Hopley's sentencing hearing last month.
"We have a case of a simple man who did a stupid thing but who treated the boy well."
Thorne said Hopley has the manner and maturity of a "child".
"Is it appropriate to put someone of Mr. Hopley's level of functioning to the dangerous offender or long-term offender regime for sentencing? This is a real stretch for the prosecution to make," he said.
If the judge decides against the psychiatric assessment it isn't clear when an actual sentence for Hopley will be handed down.
Hopley's case will be back for the judge Oct. 15 to set a date for a dangerous offender hearing.