R. v. Sparavalo

R. v. Sparavalo

Although the judge accepted that the accused touched the complainant's leg to reassure him, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any contact with the genital area was intentional or for a sexual purpose; the evidence supported inadvertent, fleeting contact and the accident defence raised a reasonable doubt, therefore the accused was acquitted of both charges.

Citation
2017 NSPC 32
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Nebojsa Sparavalo
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Sexual Assault / Sexual Exploitation / Trial Decision (provincial Court)
Outcome
Acquitted of charges under s.271 (sexual assault) and s.153(1)(a) (touching a young person for a sexual purpose) of the Criminal Code
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Sexual Exploitation (position of Trust), Standard of Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, Credibility and Reliability of Witnesses, Accident Defence / Air of Reality, Elements of Actus Reus and Mens Rea
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Sexual Assault Sexual Exploitation (position of Trust) Standard of Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Credibility and Reliability of Witnesses Accident Defence / Air of Reality +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Nebojsa Sparavalo

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Sexual Assault / Sexual Exploitation / Trial Decision (provincial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the accused intentionally touch the complainant's genital area?
  2. 2 Was any touching for a sexual purpose (specific intent under s.153(1)(a))?
  3. 3 Has the Crown proven the elements of sexual assault and sexual exploitation beyond a reasonable doubt?

Ratio Decidendi

Although the judge accepted that the accused touched the complainant's leg to reassure him, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that any contact with the genital area was intentional or for a sexual purpose; the evidence supported inadvertent, fleeting contact and the accident defence raised a reasonable doubt, therefore the accused was acquitted of both charges.

Court Disposition

Acquitted of charges under s.271 (sexual assault) and s.153(1)(a) (touching a young person for a sexual purpose) of the Criminal Code

Orders

  • Accused acquitted of both charges; no further court-ordered sanctions recorded