Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The court made s. 724(2) sentencing findings after a jury conviction for sexual interference and sexual assault, and applied Kienapple to stay the sexual assault count.
The court accepted the complainant's detailed, specific and unique evidence as credible and reliable, rejected the accused's denial as not raising a reasonable doubt, found no credible evidence of collusion or fabrication by the complainant or her mother, and therefore was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offences charged (s.271, s.151, s.152).
Source excerpt
The court acquitted P.A. of sexual interference and sexual assault, finding material inconsistencies in the complainant’s accounts and reasonable doubt on the whole evidence.
On the totality of admissible evidence the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt each essential element of all four charged offences: the complainant's credible and reliable testimony, corroborated by digital forensic records and admissions by the accused, established knowledge, sexual context, non‑consent and harassing conduct such that the accused is guilty on counts 1 through 4.
Source excerpt
The court convicted the accused of sexual exploitation and sexual assault, finding the complainant credible and the touching sexual in context.
Given the aggravated nature of the sexual assault of a 15-year-old, the Supreme Court guidance in Friesen to treat child sexual offences with increased severity, the offender's record and risk factors, a five-year federal custodial sentence is proportionate; remand credit of 441 days (1.5x 294.5 days) and an additional 60 days Covid-19 credit are applied; ancillary orders (20-year SOIRA, DNA, s.109 firearms prohibition, s.161 prohibition with 2 km/no contact terms) are imposed.
Source excerpt
The court found the accused guilty of sexual assault and sexual interference against a child, and stayed the interference conviction under Kienapple.
On the whole of the evidence the court was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant did not consent to the sexual touching (oral incident) and lacked capacity to consent to the bedroom/anal incident due to intoxication; the accused either knew or was reckless/wilfully blind to the lack of consent, his statement was rejected under the W.(D.) analysis, and therefore he was guilty of sexual assault contrary to s.271.
Source excerpt
On the totality of the evidence the accused occupied a position of trust as Youth Minister vis-à-vis the 17‑year‑old complainant, and he used that trust and influence to induce sexual activity; therefore the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt sexual exploitation contrary to s.153(1)(a) and sexual assault contrary to s.271 via vitiation of consent under s.273.1(2)(c).
Source excerpt
Trial judge accepted the complainant's core evidence as credible and reliable and found beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally touched the complainant's breasts, buttocks and inner thigh in circumstances constituting sexual interference (s.151); the Crown also proved sexual assault (s.271) but stays were imposed in relation to the two s.271 convictions under principles raised for Kineapple, such that convictions for s.151 were sustained while s.271 convictions were stayed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
