Celia Pennycook

This criminal trial concerned a charge of sexual assault against J.M. involving fellatio and vaginal intercourse with the complainant, A.M. The central issue was consent, with conflicting accounts from both parties.

The complainant alleged non-consensual acts, supported by secretly recorded phone calls where she confronted the accused about violating boundaries.

The accused maintained consent, interpreting his responses in the calls as attempts to de-escalate conflict.

The court assessed the credibility and reliability of both witnesses, noting inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony regarding the details of the assault and her initial reports to police, particularly concerning the vaginal intercourse and her use of the term "gave" for oral sex.

The court concluded that the Crown failed to prove lack of consent beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to an acquittal.

In this criminal trial before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, John Gubbels faced charges of assault with a weapon and sexual assault with a weapon against the complainant, M.D., within the context of a BDSM relationship.

The central issue was consent.

The court found the defendant not guilty of sexual assault with a weapon (Count 1) and two counts of assault with a knife (Counts 2 and 3) due to reasonable doubt regarding the complainant's consent and the defendant's knowledge of lack of consent, stemming from inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony and the nature of BDSM play.

However, the defendant was found guilty of one count of assault with a hose (Count 4), as these incidents occurred outside the BDSM context and were clearly non-consensual acts of intimidation.