The accused was charged with child luring under section 172.1 of the Criminal Code.
The Crown alleged that the accused communicated with a minor via online platforms with the purpose of facilitating the commission of child pornography offences.
The accused claimed the complainant told him she was 18 years old and never disclosed her true age until police became involved.
The trial judge rejected the accused's evidence as self-serving and inconsistent, finding it lacked credibility.
The judge accepted the complainant's evidence that she disclosed her true age (14) early in their relationship.
The court found the Crown proved all essential elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt, including the accused's knowledge of the complainant's age and his purpose in facilitating child pornography offences.
The accused was convicted.
