R. v. Gavrilko

R. v. Gavrilko

The court admitted similar fact evidence for all complainants except K.R. because the probative value of the evidence of a pattern of sexual touching by the accused in the dentist-patient context outweighed its prejudicial effect; on the evidence and credibility findings the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offences alleged in counts 1-4 but failed to do so for counts 5-7, resulting in convictions on counts 1-4 and acquittals on counts 5-7.

Citation
2007 BCSC 1476
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Oleg Yaroslavovic Gavrilko
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Assault / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Convicted on counts 1, 2, 3 and 4; Acquitted on counts 5, 6 and 7
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Similar Fact Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Consent in Medical/dental Context, Standard of Proof
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Assault Similar Fact Evidence Credibility Assessment Consent in Medical/dental Context Standard of Proof

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Oleg Yaroslavovic Gavrilko

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of similar fact evidence
  2. 2 Scope of consent to touching in dentist-patient relationship
  3. 3 Credibility of complainants and accused

Ratio Decidendi

The court admitted similar fact evidence for all complainants except K.R. because the probative value of the evidence of a pattern of sexual touching by the accused in the dentist-patient context outweighed its prejudicial effect; on the evidence and credibility findings the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offences alleged in counts 1-4 but failed to do so for counts 5-7, resulting in convictions on counts 1-4 and acquittals on counts 5-7.

Court Disposition

Convicted on counts 1, 2, 3 and 4; Acquitted on counts 5, 6 and 7

Orders

  • Convicted as charged on counts 1, 2, 3 and 4
  • Acquitted on counts 5, 6 and 7