2 total
Defendants acquitted of sexual assault; Crown failed to prove lack of capacity to consent.
Four young men were charged with sexual assault and group sexual assault following an incident in which a highly intoxicated eighteen-year-old woman was driven in a car and engaged in sexual contact with three of the four defendants.
The Crown alleged the complainant was incapable of consenting due to extreme intoxication.
The defendants argued the sexual contact was consensual.
The court acquitted all defendants, finding that while the Crown's evidence was more compelling than the defence evidence, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant lacked capacity to consent, that she did not subjectively consent, or that the defendants did not honestly believe in consent.
The judgment emphasizes the high burden of proof in criminal trials and the particular challenges in sexual assault cases involving intoxicated parties.
The accused was convicted of impaired driving after rear-ending a stopped vehicle, with minor Charter breaches not warranting evidence exclusion.
The accused was charged with impaired operation of a motor vehicle and operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol level in excess of 80 mgs/100ml following a collision where she drove into a stopped vehicle at full speed.
The Crown proved reasonable grounds for arrest based on the dangerous driving, physical observations, and odour of alcohol.
The court found breaches of the accused's Charter rights under sections 10(a) and 10(b) due to delayed notification of the change in investigation purpose and failure to advise of right to counsel.
However, the breaches were found to be minor with no real impact on the accused's interests, and the breath test evidence was admitted under section 24(2).
The court found the accused guilty of impaired operation based on both the breath test readings and the pattern of dangerous driving, mental confusion, and impaired faculties demonstrated before and after the collision.
