R. v. S.D.D.

R. v. S.D.D.

Judge accepted the detailed, consistent evidence of both child complainants (including sibling corroboration), rejected defence family witnesses and accused as biased or unreliable, found opportunities for secret assaults existed despite family presence, held delay and lack of medical/DNA did not undermine the complainants, and concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the sexual assaults alleged on both counts.

Citation
2012 BCSC 2038
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: S.D.D.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal (sexual Assault) / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Accused found guilty on both counts of sexual assault contrary to s.271 of the Criminal Code
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Child Complainants, Credibility Assessment, Corroboration, Delay in Reporting, Alibi, Propensity Reasoning, Admissibility of Video Recorded Statements (s.715.1)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Sexual Assault Child Complainants Credibility Assessment Corroboration Delay in Reporting +3 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

S.D.D.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (sexual Assault) / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved sexual assaults of two child complainants beyond a reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Credibility of child complainants versus accused and family witnesses
  3. 3 Weight of delayed reporting and lack of medical/DNA corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

Judge accepted the detailed, consistent evidence of both child complainants (including sibling corroboration), rejected defence family witnesses and accused as biased or unreliable, found opportunities for secret assaults existed despite family presence, held delay and lack of medical/DNA did not undermine the complainants, and concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the sexual assaults alleged on both counts.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty on both counts of sexual assault contrary to s.271 of the Criminal Code

Orders

  • Found guilty on Count 1: sexual assault of T.
  • Found guilty on Count 2: sexual assault of S.