H.A.P. Little

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 charged with four indictable offences: sexual assault, sexual interference, inviting a child to sexually touch the accused, and threatening death.

The complainant, a child, testified that the accused, his uncle, sexually assaulted him repeatedly over approximately 18 months while the child was between 7 and 8 years old.

The accused denied all allegations.

The trial judge found the complainant credible and rejected the accused's denials as internally and externally inconsistent.

The court found the accused guilty on all counts, emphasizing the compelling nature of the child's evidence and the accused's implausible testimony regarding constant supervision and an open bedroom door.