Nigerian Ex-Student Gets Reduced Sentence in Canadian Sexual Assault Case
A Nigerian man found guilty of sexually assaulting two women at a Canadian university has been sentenced to two years in prison, with the judge citing his racial background and personal pressures as mitigating factors. The decision by Justice Frank Hoskins of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court has ignited a fresh debate on the role of an offender's personal history in sentencing for violent crimes.
The Assaults and The Sentence
Omogbolahan "Teddy" Jegede, a 25-year-old former university football player, was convicted by a jury this year for attacks on two women at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish in 2022 and 2023. The court heard that one victim was choked nearly to unconsciousness, while another was forced to perform a sexual act. Justice Hoskins acknowledged the severity of the crimes, stating that but for the mitigating factors, the sentence would have been "much higher."
The Crown prosecution had sought a prison term of up to three years. However, the defence argued for a conditional sentence to be served in the community. Justice Hoskins rejected that, stating incarceration was necessary to express society's condemnation. He ultimately sentenced Jegede to 18 months for the more violent assault and six months for the other, to be served consecutively for a total of two years—the minimum for a federal sentence. He also added three years of probation.
The Role of the Race and Culture Assessment
A pivotal element in the sentencing was an Impact of Race and Culture Assessment (IRCA), a report funded under an initiative from the Canadian government. The IRCA writer outlined that Jegede, who moved from Lagos to Canada in 2010, faced intense pressure and a lack of culturally appropriate support. He reportedly struggled with isolation as a Black man in a predominantly white university town and had experienced bullying in school due to his accent and race.
Justice Hoskins said the IRCA provided "valuable insight" into Jegede's background from a social and cultural perspective. It noted declines in his academic performance and mental health, and an absence of adult mentors beyond his strict, church-going parents.
Judicial Reasoning and National Debate
Despite the mitigation, the judge emphasized the gravity of the offences. "This is not an isolated incident involving one victim," Hoskins said, pointing out that the two assaults occurred about five months apart under similar circumstances, which suggested a dangerous pattern. He described the violence as a primary aggravating factor.
However, the judge also highlighted Jegede's youth, his strong family support, and his expressed desire to complete his degree. Hoskins even suggested Jegede would be a "really good candidate for probably early parole." The use of IRCAs in sentencing is a relatively new practice in Canada, aimed at helping judges understand the effects of racism and marginalization on an offender's life.
This case has reignited a contentious national conversation in Canada about whether personal background and systemic racism should lessen accountability for serious, violent crimes, balancing the need for denunciation with principles of restorative justice.
