The Supreme Court of Canada has sent a blunt message to the country’s appellate courts on sexual assault: that they have been needlessly tossing out convictions for nearly two decades, over a perception that trial judges did not sufficiently explain why they believed the complainant.
Yet appeal judges have repeatedly done exactly that – especially in sexual-assault cases, where appellate courts too often do not accept a trial judge’s finding that the complainant told the truth, the Supreme Court said Friday. The Supreme Court said consent and capacity can be looked at together. And the appeal court misread the judge’s comments on intoxication; they were made in the context of the 16-year-old, who testified she had consumed eight to 10 shots of liquor, an extreme amount, the court said.
The court ruled 8-1 Friday that the conviction of the couple, identified only by their initials, G.F. and R.B., should be restored. Justice Suzanne Côté dissented.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: globeandmail - 🏆 5. / 92 Read more »
Source: globeandmail - 🏆 5. / 92 Read more »
Source: CTVNews - 🏆 1. / 99 Read more »
Source: globeandmail - 🏆 5. / 92 Read more »