Decide cites ‘unreliability’ of accused, complainant in sexual assault trial verdict
A 37-year-old Brantford man with an extended prison historical past was acquitted of expenses of sexual assault and forcible confinement as a result of a choose discovered his accuser to be an equally unreliable witness.
Article content material
A 37-year-old Brantford man with an extended prison historical past was acquitted of expenses of sexual assault and forcible confinement as a result of a choose discovered his accuser to be an equally unreliable witness.
Article content material
Ontario Courtroom Justice Colette Good mentioned she discovered the person to be a “very dishonest witness” throughout the trial. “There may be little or no I consider about his testimony.”
The choose mentioned the person “conveniently” forgot to say that he and the lady had what he later described as consensual intercourse at his house, saying it “slipped his thoughts.”
And the lady, who accused the person of trapping her in his house, was inconsistent in her story, mentioned the choose, including that the lady apparently visited different houses throughout her supposed confinement and appeared to be on a “drug-bender.”
“The courtroom doesn’t know whether or not (he) took benefit of (her) by plying her with medication so he might sexually assault her or whether or not (she) was keen to interact in sexual exercise in alternate for medication or friendship.”
Article content material
Good mentioned that defence lawyer Dale Henderson offered a believable idea, suggesting the lady didn’t need her household to know she had relapsed into drug use so she falsely accused the person to elucidate an absence that had police trying to find her for 2 weeks.
Additionally believable was the Crown’s idea that the lady was on a drug bender when she met the person and he took benefit of her dependancy to sexually assault and abuse her.
The lady, a fentanyl person, testified that mentioned she misplaced the flexibility to maneuver after the person gave her medication. She mentioned she tried to get out however was prevented from leaving.
Courtroom heard that there was little proof of the accidents she mentioned she obtained from being raped and “punched onerous within the face 10 occasions.” And, when the person was arrested for a confrontation with a neighbour, as an alternative of telling police she had been assaulted and confined, the lady alerted a male buddy who came visiting and stole the accused man’s possessions. She didn’t return to her household.
“When the police arrested (the person), it was an ideal alternative to inform them what occurred to her and he or she mentioned nothing, and as an alternative orchestrated a break-and-enter into his house,” the choose famous. “As a result of unreliability of her proof, intoxication and the passage of time, the courtroom is unable to discern with any diploma of confidence the elements of her testimony which might be actual, imagined or outright lies.”
For the reason that Crown bears the onus of proving the fees, the choose mentioned the proof merely didn’t meet the usual required and the person was acquitted.
SGamble@postmedia.com
