R. v. R.B.J.

R. v. R.B.J.

The judge acquitted because the Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt: the complainant’s evidence contained inconsistencies and implausibilities, there was no evidence of drugging, and unchallenged medical evidence showed the accused had severe movement limitations making the alleged sexual acts unlikely; under W.D. the unresolved credibility and resulting reasonable doubt required acquittal.

Citation
2010 NSSC 122
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: R.B.J.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Assault / Trial (judgment)
Outcome
Not guilty
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Consent, Credibility, Reasonable Doubt, Publication Ban, Medical Incapacity
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Offences Sexual Assault Consent Credibility Reasonable Doubt 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

R.B.J.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault / Trial (judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused committed sexual assault contrary to s.271(1)(a) Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether the Crown proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under the W.D. credibility framework
  3. 3 Whether the accused’s medical condition made the alleged acts physically possible

Ratio Decidendi

The judge acquitted because the Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt: the complainant’s evidence contained inconsistencies and implausibilities, there was no evidence of drugging, and unchallenged medical evidence showed the accused had severe movement limitations making the alleged sexual acts unlikely; under W.D. the unresolved credibility and resulting reasonable doubt required acquittal.

Court Disposition

Not guilty

Orders

  • Accused found not guilty of sexual assault contrary to s.271(1)(a) Criminal Code
  • Publication ban maintained pursuant to s.486(3) of the Criminal Code