R v. M.M.

R v. M.M.

The court accepted the complainant as credible and reliable; the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the early childhood 'sleepover' touching was for a sexual purpose (sexual interference not proven), but proved beyond a reasonable doubt that two incidents during the complainant's teenage years involved intentional, objectively sexual touching without consent, constituting sexual assault under s.271; defence witness testimony was found unreliable on key points.

Citation
2022 NSPC 33
Parties
Crown: His Majesty the King; Defendant: M.M.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Convicted on the two counts relating to the teenage incidents (sexual assault under s.271); early childhood sexual interference allegations not proven / no conviction on those counts; Crown may consider staying one count.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Sexual Interference, Credibility, Mens Rea, Actus Reus, Consent, Child Complainant
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Sexual Assault Sexual Interference Credibility Mens Rea Actus Reus +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

His Majesty the King

Crown

M.M.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed sexual interference (s.151) and sexual assault (s.271)
  2. 2 Whether the touching alleged from early childhood was for a sexual purpose
  3. 3 Whether the two incidents alleged during the complainant's teenage years constituted sexual assault

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the complainant as credible and reliable; the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the early childhood 'sleepover' touching was for a sexual purpose (sexual interference not proven), but proved beyond a reasonable doubt that two incidents during the complainant's teenage years involved intentional, objectively sexual touching without consent, constituting sexual assault under s.271; defence witness testimony was found unreliable on key points.

Court Disposition

Convicted on the two counts relating to the teenage incidents (sexual assault under s.271); early childhood sexual interference allegations not proven / no conviction on those counts; Crown may consider staying one count.

Orders

  • Conviction entered on counts three and four (sexual assault contrary to s.271 of the Criminal Code)
  • Counts one and two (sexual interference under s.151) not proven / Crown offered no evidence on those counts