R. v. J.R.M.

R. v. J.R.M.

On assessment of credibility and applying W.(D.), the judge accepted the complainant and third‑party witness as credible, rejected the accused's account of consent, and was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused penetrated the complainant while she was asleep and did not consent, warranting a conviction for sexual assault.

Citation
2011 NSSC 499
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: J. R. M.; Complainant: S. J.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Assault / Trial Verdict
Outcome
Convicted of sexual assault
Legal Topics
Consent, Credibility, Reasonable Doubt, W.(d.) Charge, Sexual Assault Elements
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Consent Credibility Reasonable Doubt W.(d.) Charge Sexual Assault Elements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

J. R. M.

Accused

S. J.

Complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault / Trial Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant voluntarily consented to the sexual activity
  2. 2 Assessment of credibility of the accused and two witnesses
  3. 3 Application of W.(D.) principles to credibility

Ratio Decidendi

On assessment of credibility and applying W.(D.), the judge accepted the complainant and third‑party witness as credible, rejected the accused's account of consent, and was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused penetrated the complainant while she was asleep and did not consent, warranting a conviction for sexual assault.

Court Disposition

Convicted of sexual assault

Orders

  • Conviction entered
  • Pre‑sentence report may be requested before sentencing