The accused was charged with sexual interference and administering a stupefying substance to his 11-year-old step-daughter.
During a pre-charge conference, the issue arose whether the accused could be found to have 'administered' the substances (alcohol, marijuana, and pills) if the child voluntarily consumed them.
The court ruled that the jury would not be instructed to consider consensual consumption, finding that an 11-year-old cannot give fully informed consent to consuming such substances, particularly when provided by a parent figure with the alleged intent to facilitate a sexual assault.
