R. v. Dias

R. v. Dias

The videotaped statement of the child was admissible and substantively reliable; viewed with the grandmother's evidence and the accused's recorded admissions, the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally touched the complainant for a sexual purpose in Peru and thus was guilty of sexual interference (Count 3). The Crown did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the touching in Vancouver was objectively sexual or committed for a sexual purpose; the accused is acquitted on Counts 1 and 2.

Citation
2023 BCSC 1373
Parties
Crown: Rex; Accused: Garcia Ribeiro Dias
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Acquitted on Counts 1 and 2; Convicted on Count 3 (sexual interference)
Legal Topics
Sexual Interference, Sexual Assault, Hearsay Principled Exception, Admissibility, Credibility Assessment, Voir Dire
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Offences Child Protection Sexual Interference Sexual Assault Hearsay Principled Exception Admissibility +2 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 7 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Crown

Garcia Ribeiro Dias

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility and reliability of complainant's videotaped police statement under the principled hearsay exception
  2. 2 Voluntariness and use of accused's police statement
  3. 3 Whether touching in Vancouver was of a sexual nature (sexual assault)

Ratio Decidendi

The videotaped statement of the child was admissible and substantively reliable; viewed with the grandmother's evidence and the accused's recorded admissions, the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally touched the complainant for a sexual purpose in Peru and thus was guilty of sexual interference (Count 3). The Crown did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the touching in Vancouver was objectively sexual or committed for a sexual purpose; the accused is acquitted on Counts 1 and 2.

Court Disposition

Acquitted on Counts 1 and 2; Convicted on Count 3 (sexual interference)

Orders

  • Count 1 (sexual assault) - Not guilty
  • Count 2 (sexual interference, Vancouver) - Not guilty