P. Schott

A youth was charged with two counts of assault arising from an incident where burning flammable liquid came into contact with another youth's face and torso.

The Crown alleged the defendant deliberately threw the burning liquid at the complainant.

The defence argued it was an accidental splash caused by the defendant slipping and falling after being struck with water.

The court found the defendant's evidence credible and consistent, and that both versions of events provided reasonable explanations for how the injury occurred.

The court held that the Crown failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt and acquitted the defendant on both counts.

The accused, a school bus driver, was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference of a nine-year-old complainant.

The Crown's case rested solely on the testimony of the child, who alleged that the accused repeatedly touched his genitals over his clothing while driving the bus and referred to him as his girlfriend.

The accused denied all allegations, claiming the references to "mice" were to discourage children from eating on the bus and that any contact was innocuous.

A witness called by the defence, a fellow student who the complainant claimed witnessed the assaults, testified she saw no such contact.

Despite finding the complainant credible and rejecting the accused's denials as lacking credibility, the court found reasonable doubt existed based on the oddness of the allegations, the accused's presumption of innocence, and the conflicting witness evidence, resulting in an acquittal.