R. v. A.W.H.

R. v. A.W.H.

Judge found the February 2016 videotaped interview admissible and that, taken with the child's prior spontaneous negative reaction in October 2014 and the February 2015 interview acknowledging a 'secret', the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused touched the complainant on her vagina with his hand (s.151). Narrative embellishments did not negate the core allegation; count 2 was stayed under Kienapple.

Citation
2017 NSPC 19
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: A.W.H.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Offences / Trial Decision (conviction)
Outcome
Convicted on Count 1 (s.151 Criminal Code); Count 2 (s.271) stayed pursuant to Kienapple
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Section 151 Criminal Code, Section 271 Criminal Code, Child Witness Credibility, 715.1 Voir Dire, Kienapple Stay
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Child Protection Sexual Assault Section 151 Criminal Code Section 271 Criminal Code Child Witness Credibility 715.1 Voir Dire +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

A.W.H.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Offences / Trial Decision (conviction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved sexual touching of a child beyond a reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Admissibility and weight of the February 2016 videotaped interview under s.715.1
  3. 3 Whether the complainant was influenced or coached by adults

Ratio Decidendi

Judge found the February 2016 videotaped interview admissible and that, taken with the child's prior spontaneous negative reaction in October 2014 and the February 2015 interview acknowledging a 'secret', the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused touched the complainant on her vagina with his hand (s.151). Narrative embellishments did not negate the core allegation; count 2 was stayed under Kienapple.

Court Disposition

Convicted on Count 1 (s.151 Criminal Code); Count 2 (s.271) stayed pursuant to Kienapple

Orders

  • Conviction entered on Count 1 (touching a young person for a sexual purpose, Criminal Code s.151)
  • Count 2 stayed pursuant to R. v. Kienapple