R. v. A.F.

R. v. A.F.

The Crown did not prove the offences beyond a reasonable doubt because significant and central internal and external inconsistencies in the complainant's account (timing, sequence and evolution of alleged acts), coupled with implausibilities concerning frequent, risky conduct in vehicles and unresolved contradictions with other witness evidence, undermined confidence in the Crown's version; accordingly the accused was acquitted on both counts.

Citation
2021 BCSC 2662
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: A.F.; Complainant: M.C.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Assault and Sexual Interference / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Not guilty on both counts (acquitted)
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Sexual Interference, Credibility Assessment, Child Complainant Testimony, Publication Ban, Reasonable Doubt
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Offences Sexual Assault Sexual Interference Credibility Assessment Child Complainant Testimony Publication Ban +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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

A.F.

Accused

M.C.

Complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault and Sexual Interference / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved sexual interference and sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Credibility and reliability of the complainant's evidence given internal and external inconsistencies
  3. 3 Plausibility of alleged repeated incidents in the house and in vehicles given opportunities for detection

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown did not prove the offences beyond a reasonable doubt because significant and central internal and external inconsistencies in the complainant's account (timing, sequence and evolution of alleged acts), coupled with implausibilities concerning frequent, risky conduct in vehicles and unresolved contradictions with other witness evidence, undermined confidence in the Crown's version; accordingly the accused was acquitted on both counts.

Court Disposition

Not guilty on both counts (acquitted)

Orders

  • Accused found not guilty on Count 1 (sexual interference, s.151) and Count 2 (sexual assault, s.271)
  • Publication ban imposed under s.486.4(2)(b) of the Criminal Code restricting identification of complainant and witnesses (indefinite, subject to further order)