R. v. A.M.

R. v. A.M.

Although the complainant was generally credible, the Crown failed to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt due to significant lack of specific, incident-linked detail, material inconsistencies, and doubts about the weight of M.S.'s evidence of an admission and subsequent recantation; on the whole of the evidence the judge was unable to decide who to believe and acquitted the accused.

Citation
2023 BCSC 2097
Parties
Crown: Rex; Accused: A.M.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Offences (sexual Interference and Sexual Assault) / Trial Judgment Acquittal
Outcome
Accused acquitted on both counts
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Sexual Interference, Credibility Assessment, Out of Court Admissions, Publication Ban S.486.4
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Family Law (background) Sexual Assault Sexual Interference Credibility Assessment Out of Court Admissions Publication Ban S.486.4

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Crown

A.M.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Offences (sexual Interference and Sexual Assault) / Trial Judgment Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved sexual interference and sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Assessment of credibility and reliability of complainant and accused
  3. 3 Weight and reliability of accused's alleged out-of-court admission to M.S.

Ratio Decidendi

Although the complainant was generally credible, the Crown failed to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt due to significant lack of specific, incident-linked detail, material inconsistencies, and doubts about the weight of M.S.'s evidence of an admission and subsequent recantation; on the whole of the evidence the judge was unable to decide who to believe and acquitted the accused.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted on both counts

Orders

  • Verdict: Not guilty on Count 1 (sexual interference) and Count 2 (sexual assault)
  • Publication ban imposed under s.486.4 Criminal Code restricting identification of complainant/witnesses, indefinite