Travis Hughes

This ruling addresses two Crown applications in a Youth Criminal Justice Act case: one to admit evidence of prior discreditable conduct and another (Seaboyer application) to introduce evidence of other sexual activity.

The accused, J.B., a young person charged with sexual assault, was 13 at the time of the alleged assault, but the prior incidents occurred when he was 11 and thus legally a child incapable of forming criminal intent.

The court dismissed both applications, finding that the prejudicial effect of admitting evidence of acts committed when the accused was a child, and therefore lacked mens rea, outweighed its probative value.

The court emphasized the unique considerations for young persons and the significant time gap between the incidents.

The appellant appealed her conviction for fraud exceeding $5,000 arising from misrepresentations related to Ontario Works social benefits.

The appellant initially qualified for benefits as a sole-support parent and was obligated to report changes in income, assets, or living circumstances.

The Crown alleged the appellant failed to disclose a change of residence and a change in her benefit unit status.

The trial judge convicted the appellant without making clear findings on whether she was co-habiting with Mr. Weedmark and misapprehended evidence regarding the tenancy agreement.

The Court of Appeal found these errors were material to the verdict and allowed the appeal.