R. v. C. L.

R. v. C. L.

The judge found both the complainant's and the accused's accounts plausible but, due to significant credibility concerns with the complainant (inconsistencies, changes to accommodate known facts, tailored testimony) and the accused's consistent evidence corroborated in part by an independent witness, the Crown did not prove the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt; applying the W.(D.) directions, the accused was acquitted.

Citation
2022 BCSC 2494
Parties
Crown: Rex; Accused: C. L.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Interference / Judgment After Trial (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Acquitted (Not guilty)
Legal Topics
Sexual Interference, Credibility Assessment, Publication Ban, Amendment of Indictment
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Interference Credibility Assessment Publication Ban Amendment of Indictment

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Crown

C. L.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Interference / Judgment After Trial (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused intentionally touched the complainant
  2. 2 Whether the touching was for a sexual purpose
  3. 3 Whether the Crown proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt given conflicting testimony

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found both the complainant's and the accused's accounts plausible but, due to significant credibility concerns with the complainant (inconsistencies, changes to accommodate known facts, tailored testimony) and the accused's consistent evidence corroborated in part by an independent witness, the Crown did not prove the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt; applying the W.(D.) directions, the accused was acquitted.

Court Disposition

Acquitted (Not guilty)

Orders

  • Accused found not guilty of Count 1 contrary to s.151 of the Criminal Code
  • Publication ban under s.486.4 of the Criminal Code restricting identification of the complainant applies indefinitely