Child Luring Lawyers Toronto

Written by Daniel Brown

Etching of a smartphone with three empty speech bubbles on its screen, lying beside a closed laptop, on white paper

Child luring means communicating with someone under 18, or someone you believe is under 18, by text, social media, an app, or any other means of telecommunication, for the purpose of making it easier to commit a sexual offence against them, under section 172.1 of the Criminal Code. It carries a maximum of 14 years. For offences committed on or after July 18, 2026, it also carries a mandatory minimum of one year in jail on indictment. Our lawyers defend child luring charges, including police sting cases, in Toronto and across the GTA.

Defending internet luring charges in Ontario

A child luring charge is one of the most stigmatizing accusations a person can face. A conviction brings jail, a likely listing on the national sex offender registry, and court orders that can limit where you go, where you work, and how you use the internet for years.

Most luring cases are built almost entirely on messages. Many begin with a police officer posing online as a teenager. What was said, who said it, what the accused believed about the other person’s age, and why they were communicating are often the whole case.

Daniel Brown Law defends sexual offence charges across the Greater Toronto Area and Ontario, including Toronto, Newmarket, Oshawa, Brampton, and Milton. Daniel Brown Law is recognized among Canada’s top criminal defence firms — see our recognition below.

If you or someone you know has been charged with child luring, contact our office immediately at (416) 297-7200.

Call 416-297-7200
See the defences
The charge
Criminal Code s. 172.1Luring a child
Crown must prove
A message and a purposeAnd a belief the person was underage
Maximum sentence
14 yearsOn indictment
Mandatory minimum
1 yearOn indictment; 6 months summarily, for offences on or after July 18, 2026

What counts as child luring?

The offence depends on two things: the age the person is, or is believed to be, and the offence the communication was meant to make easier. Each age has its own list.

Section 172.1 of the Criminal Code. Sexual extortion was added to the under-18 list for offences on or after July 18, 2026.

What the Crown must prove

An intentional communication

The accused communicated by a means of telecommunication: text messages, social media, messaging apps, chat in online games, email, or a phone call. The communication itself is the offence; no meeting has to happen.

With a person under age

The other person was under the relevant age, or the accused believed they were. The Crown must prove that belief beyond a reasonable doubt.

For the purpose of facilitating an offence

The accused communicated for the specific purpose of making it easier to commit one of the listed offences against that person. The purpose is judged by what the accused actually intended at the time of the communication.

Key considerations

“Facilitating” is broad

Facilitating includes helping to bring about an offence and making it easier or more probable: grooming a young person, lowering their inhibitions, or sexual talk that exploits their curiosity or immaturity.

Explicit language is not required

Sexually explicit messages are not an essential element. A conversation with no explicit content can still be luring if the evidence as a whole proves the purpose. Explicit messages, on their own, do not prove it either.

A real child is not required

The offence covers a person the accused believes is underage. Many cases involve an adult police officer posing online as a teenager, and no child is ever involved.

Consent is not a defence

A young person’s apparent agreement does not answer the charge. The defences of consent and mistaken belief about age are tightly limited for sexual offences involving young people.

Belief about age in child luring cases

What the accused believed about the other person’s age is at the centre of most luring cases, and above all police sting cases.

The Crown must prove belief

The Criminal Code once said that if a person was represented as underage, that was proof the accused believed it. That presumption has been struck down. The Crown must now prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused actually believed the person was underage.

Reasonable steps to check age

An accused cannot rely on a belief that the person was old enough unless they took reasonable steps to find out the person’s age. But failing to take those steps does not, on its own, prove the accused believed the person was underage.

What was represented matters

A stated age, a profile, a photo, talk about school, or a claim to be an adult can all bear on what the accused believed. The whole conversation is read together, not single lines out of context.

How age is counted and proved

A person reaches an age at the start of the relevant birthday. Where a real young person is involved, the Criminal Code allows specific methods of proving their age.

What are the best defences to child luring?

Each defence answers a different part of the Crown’s case.

Etching of a magnifying glass resting on a stack of printed pages of a message log, with a pencil and a paper clip, on white paper

You did not believe they were underage

Attacks: belief about age

If the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt about whether the accused believed the person was under 18, 16, or 14, the offence is not proven, particularly where the accused took real steps to check.

It was not for the purpose of an offence

Attacks: the purpose

Communicating with a young person, even inappropriately, is not luring without proof of the specific purpose of facilitating a listed offence. The Crown must prove what the accused intended.

You did not send the messages

Attacks: identity

Shared phones, shared computers, borrowed accounts, and fake profiles are common. The Crown must prove the accused was the person typing.

The messages were taken out of context

Attacks: the record

Screenshots and excerpts can leave out what came before and after. Recovering the full conversation can change what the messages mean.

The police went too far

Attacks: the investigation

Online sting operations must stay within the law. Where police offer the opportunity to commit an offence without reasonable suspicion or a genuine investigation, or induce the offence, the defence of entrapment can lead to a stay of the charge.

The evidence was obtained unlawfully

Attacks: the evidence itself

Charter rights breaches: excluding phone and computer searches, account records, or production order results obtained without proper authorization, or a statement taken without access to a lawyer.

Do not give the police a statement before you get legal advice. You are not required to, and what you say can be used against you — including an explanation of what a message meant or who you thought you were talking to.

What is the sentence for child luring in Canada?

Child luring carries a maximum of 14 years on indictment. For offences on or after July 18, 2026, the minimum is one year on indictment and six months on summary conviction.

Charge Maximum Mandatory minimum
Luring a child, on indictments. 172.1(2)(a) 14 years 1 year
Luring a child, summary convictions. 172.1(2)(b) 2 years less a day 6 months
Agreement or arrangement to commit a sexual offence against a child, on indictments. 172.2(2)(a) 14 years 1 year
Agreement or arrangement, summary convictions. 172.2(2)(b) 2 years less a day 6 months

Child luring is a hybrid offence: the Crown chooses whether to proceed by indictment or summarily. The courts struck down the luring minimums in 2023, and Parliament restored them for offences committed on or after July 18, 2026. For an offence committed before that date, no minimum applies. Since July 18, 2026, the judge must impose a shorter jail term than the minimum where the minimum would be cruel and unusual punishment for that offender. The sentence must still be jail, and the judge must give reasons.

A conditional sentence served in the community is not available where a minimum applies, or where the Crown proceeds by indictment for a sexual offence against a person under 18. Where an offence involves the abuse of a person under 18, the judge must give primary consideration to denunciation and deterrence. Courts treat online luring seriously because offenders can reach children easily and out of public view, and the risk grows sharply where messages lead to a plan to meet. Rehabilitation still matters, and evidence about the accused’s circumstances, treatment, and risk can shape the sentence.

Consequences of a luring conviction

A luring conviction goes far beyond jail time. Collateral consequences can include:

  • A sex offender registry order: mandatory where the Crown proceeded by indictment and the sentence is two years or more, and otherwise ordered unless the accused shows it would serve no purpose or would be grossly disproportionate
  • A prohibition order, for any period up to life, that can bar attending parks, pools, schools, and community centres, working or volunteering with young people, contact with anyone under 18, and using the internet except on the court’s conditions
  • Job loss and disqualification from certain professions
  • Immigration problems, including possible deportation for non-citizens
  • Denial of entry into the United States and other countries
  • A criminal record stored in the national CPIC database

For more on collateral impacts, see our page on the immigration consequences of a criminal charge.

Why choose Daniel Brown Law for your luring case?

A child luring conviction can mean jail, registration as a sex offender, and years of court-ordered restrictions. The lawyer hired in the first 48 hours often shapes the entire case — the bail conditions, the challenge to the investigation, and whether the Crown can prove what you believed and intended.

A nationally recognized defence firm

Daniel Brown Law is consistently recognized as one of Canada’s leading criminal defence firms. Canadian Lawyer ranks it among Canada’s top criminal law boutiques, The Globe and Mail names it one of Canada’s Best Law Firms, Best Law Firms ranks it Tier 1 for criminal defence, and Toronto Star readers have repeatedly voted it Best Law Firm.

A boutique focused on criminal defence

Daniel Brown Law represents people charged with crimes — that is all the firm does. Our lawyers have defended sexual offence cases at every level of court in Ontario, from first-appearance bail hearings to contested jury trials to appeals at the Court of Appeal for Ontario.

Police sting and entrapment challenges

Many luring cases start with an undercover officer online. We examine how the investigation began, who started the conversation, and how it unfolded, because a sting that crosses the line can end the case.

Digital evidence, examined closely

Luring cases turn on phone extractions, account records, and chat logs. We test how that evidence was obtained, whether it is complete, and whether it shows who was actually typing.

Trial and appellate capability under one roof

Mandatory minimums and registry orders make luring cases strong candidates for appeal. Our lawyers handle both stages, so the trial record is built with appellate review in mind. Read more about our criminal appeals practice.

Across the GTA and Ontario

We appear regularly in Toronto, Newmarket, Oshawa, Brampton, Milton, Hamilton, and Barrie courthouses, and travel to other Ontario courts as a case requires.

Recognized by the profession and the public

Daniel Brown Law is named one of Canada’s Best Law Firms by The Globe and Mail, ranked among Canada’s top criminal law boutiques by Canadian Lawyer, ranked Tier 1 for criminal defence by Best Law Firms, and voted Best Law Firm by Toronto Star readers. Five of its lawyers are recognized by Best Lawyers in Canada for criminal defence.

The Globe and Mail Best Law Firms 2026, Criminal Law

Best Law Firms: Criminal Law

The Globe and Mail, 2026

Canadian Lawyer Top Criminal Law Boutique 2026-27

Top Criminal Law Boutique

Canadian Lawyer, 2026–27

Best Law Firms Canada, Criminal Defence Tier 1, 2026

Criminal Defence, Tier 1

Best Law Firms Canada, 2026

Best Lawyers in Canada 2027, Daniel Brown Law

Best Lawyers in Canada

Criminal Defence, 2027

Chambers Canada 2027, Ranked in Canada, Daniel Brown Law

Crime, Nationwide

Chambers Canada, 2027

Toronto Star Readers' Choice winner seal

Toronto Star Readers’ Choice

Best Law Firm and Best Legal Services, repeat winner

Daniel Brown Law is consistently recognized as one of Canada's leading criminal defence firms.

What happens after a child luring charge?

The first weeks after a luring charge, and the bail conditions set at the start, often shape the whole case.

  1. Arrest and the bail hearing

    Bail conditions in luring cases often restrict internet use, devices, and contact with young people. We prepare a release plan and sureties that answer the Crown’s concerns without needless restrictions.

  2. Disclosure

    Luring cases come with chat logs, phone and computer extractions, account records, and, in sting cases, the officer’s notes and scripts. We review all of it.

  3. Charter and entrapment applications

    We examine every search, production order, and statement, and how any undercover operation was started and run, and apply to exclude evidence or stay the charge.

  4. Resolution

    Some luring cases resolve without a trial: charges withdrawn, or a plea to a less serious offence with no mandatory minimum or registry consequences.

  5. Trial, and appeal if needed

    At trial the Crown must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt, including what you believed about the other person’s age and why you were communicating. A conviction or sentence can be appealed.

Frequently asked questions about child luring charges

Plain answers to the questions people ask most after a child luring charge.

The offence

What is child luring?

Under section 172.1 of the Criminal Code, it is an offence to communicate by any means of telecommunication with a person who is, or who the accused believes is, under 18, 16, or 14, depending on the offence, for the purpose of facilitating a listed sexual offence, or abduction, against that person.

What does the Crown have to prove?

Three things: an intentional communication by telecommunication; with a person the accused knew or believed was under the relevant age; for the specific purpose of facilitating one of the listed offences against that person.

Do the messages have to be sexual?

No. Sexually explicit language is not an essential element. The question is whether the evidence as a whole proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accused communicated for the purpose of facilitating a listed offence.

Do I have to have met, or planned to meet, the person?

No. The offence is complete when the communication is made for the prohibited purpose. A plan to meet is not required, although courts treat it as making the offence more serious.

What is sextortion, and is it luring?

For offences on or after July 18, 2026, communicating with a person under 18 to facilitate extortion of a sexual nature or for a sexual purpose is child luring. Extortion itself is a separate charge; see our page on extortion charges.

Is agreeing to meet a child for sex a separate offence?

Yes. Under section 172.2, agreeing or making an arrangement with another person, by telecommunication, to commit a listed sexual offence against a child is an offence with the same penalties as luring. It is no defence that the other person was a police officer or that the child did not exist.

Police stings and age

Can I be charged if I was talking to a police officer?

Yes. The offence covers a person the accused believes is underage, so communicating with an adult officer posing as a young person can be luring. The Crown must still prove that the accused actually believed the person was underage.

What if I thought the person was an adult?

The Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you believed the person was underage. But you cannot rely on a belief that they were old enough unless you took reasonable steps to find out their age.

Is it entrapment when police pose as a child online?

Not automatically. Police may run online investigations, but they cannot offer the opportunity to commit an offence without reasonable suspicion or a genuine investigation of a particular place, and they cannot induce the offence. Read more about the entrapment defence.

Sentencing and consequences

What is the minimum sentence for child luring?

For offences committed on or after July 18, 2026, one year in jail on indictment and six months on summary conviction, with a maximum of 14 years on indictment. The judge must go below the minimum where it would be cruel and unusual punishment for that offender, but the sentence must still be jail. For offences before July 18, 2026, no minimum applies.

Can I get house arrest for child luring?

Rarely, if ever. A conditional sentence is not available where a minimum applies, or where the Crown proceeds by indictment for a sexual offence against a person under 18. Courts have said denunciation and general deterrence will rarely be met by a conditional sentence for this offence.

Will I have to register as a sex offender?

Probably. A sex offender registry order is mandatory where the Crown proceeded by indictment and the sentence is two years or more, and otherwise must be made unless the accused shows it would serve no purpose or would be grossly disproportionate. Learn more about the sex offender registry.

Can the court ban me from the internet or from places children go?

Yes. On a luring conviction involving a person under 18, the court must consider a prohibition order that can bar attending parks, pools, schools, and community centres, working or volunteering with young people, contact with anyone under 18, and using the internet except on the court’s conditions. It can last for life.

Bail and related charges

What happens at bail on a luring charge?

Bail conditions commonly restrict internet use, devices, and contact with anyone under 18. We work to secure release on conditions that let you keep working and living your life. Learn more on our page about Toronto bail hearings.

What charges are laid alongside child luring?

Luring charges often arrive alongside sexual exploitation, invitation to sexual touching, child pornography (CSAEM), or sexual assault charges.

Charges we defend

Learn more about some of the charges we defend. We also defend charges not listed here.

Charged with child luring? Speak with Daniel Brown Law

Call Daniel Brown Law at (416) 297-7200 for a confidential consultation. We appear in courts across the GTA and Ontario.

Call 416-297-7200
Get advice today