A Carcross woman who was deemed a long-term offender earlier this month is appealing her sentence, claiming the judge didn't take her First Nations status into account.

On Sept. 17, Helen June Good was sentenced to three years in prison, followed by 10 years of supervision as a designated long-term offender for "viciously assaulting” her husband.

The attack, which left the man with a broken jaw, was the latest incident in a 40-year history of violence outlined in territorial Judge John Faulkner's reasons for sentencing.

At her sentencing hearing, Good's lawyer argued the 59-year-old woman should be sentenced to two years less a day, which would allow her to stay in the territory's jail, where she is currently taking treatment and counselling.

But Faulkner said he was convinced Good had earned a harsher sentence, and needed intensive treatment for her borderline personality disorder, treatment that isn't offered at the Whitehorse Correctional Centre.

Once she is out of prison, the judge ordered that Good be closely monitored as a long-term offender for 10 years, a sentence reserved for the "worst offender/worst offence” category of cases.

"In my view, this is one of those clearest of cases,” the judge wrote in his reasons.

"The offender's record of violence extends for over 40 years. It is punctuated only by periods of imprisonment or relatively brief periods of stability. The violence has continued to a time in life when most offenders have burned out.

"Her violent episodes are, most often, severe and, most often, perpetuated against defenceless victims.

Despite years of therapy, the offender fails to take ownership of her violence, but continues to seek refuge in her own victimization as a justification. The assessments all say the same thing. She is at a very high risk to reoffend, particularly if she abuses alcohol.”

Last week, Good filed an appeal of that decision. She said the three-year sentence and 10-year supervision order are "excessive”, and should be replaced with a jail sentence of two years less a day, followed by three years' probation.

She bases her argument on section 718.2 (e) of the Criminal Code, which instructs judges to pay "particular attention to the circumstances of aboriginal offenders” when sentencing.

"...because the circumstances of aboriginal people are unique. The judge must therefore consider the unique systematic or background factors that may have played a part in bringing the offender before the court,” the Criminal Code states.

It goes on to say, "This (section) should not, however, be taken as a means of automatically reducing the prison sentence of aboriginal offenders .... Generally, the more violent and serious the offence, the more likely it is as a practical reality that the terms of imprisonment for aboriginals and non-aboriginals will be close to each other or the same.”

In his Sept. 17 decision, Faulkner made note of the "neglect and abuse that (Good) has suffered at the hands of her parents, partners, caregivers, and associates.”

However, he also noted that "much of the therapy and counselling Helen has engaged in over the years has been ineffective at best, and, more likely, counterproductive. It has allowed Helen to see herself only as a victim and to blame her violence on her own abuse.

"For instance, she reports and justifies assaulting men because they reminded her of her father. She has never developed any notable empathy for her victims.”

Good's appeal will be considered by the Yukon Supreme Court. No hearing date has been set.