R. v. T.R.J.

R. v. T.R.J.

The complainant's video‑recorded statement and trial testimony, when assessed in light of her age, linguistic limitations and the totality of the evidence, were credible and reliable beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies were explicable and insufficient to raise a reasonable doubt, and therefore the accused was guilty of repeated oral sexual interference of the complainant.

Citation
2014 BCSC 2451
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Regina; Accused/defendant: T.R.J.; Complainant/victim: S.J.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Interference (s.151 Criminal Code) / Trial (conviction)
Outcome
Guilty (convicted of sexual interference)
Legal Topics
Sexual Interference, Child Sexual Abuse, Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of Child's Statement (s.715.1), Publication Ban
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Law Child Protection Sexual Interference Child Sexual Abuse Credibility Assessment Admissibility of Child's Statement (s.715.1) +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown/prosecution

T.R.J.

Accused/defendant

S.J.

Complainant/victim

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Interference (s.151 Criminal Code) / Trial (conviction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved sexual interference beyond a reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Reliability and admissibility of the complainant's video‑recorded statement under s.715.1
  3. 3 Assessment of credibility of child complainant and accused

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant's video‑recorded statement and trial testimony, when assessed in light of her age, linguistic limitations and the totality of the evidence, were credible and reliable beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies were explicable and insufficient to raise a reasonable doubt, and therefore the accused was guilty of repeated oral sexual interference of the complainant.

Court Disposition

Guilty (convicted of sexual interference)

Orders

  • Convicted of sexual interference contrary to s.151 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46
  • Publication ban imposed pursuant to s.486.4(2) of the Criminal Code prohibiting publication of any information that could identify the victim