How to Defend Against Sexual Assault Charges

Mississauga Criminal Lawyer Randy Norris defends Sexual Assault Charges

Sexual assaults can involve adults or children as the complaining parties. If you are charged with a sexual offence, you need to contact me. Sexual assaults are tricky to defend and they require experienced counsel who knows how to cross-examine witnesses effectively. Cross-examination is a skill that comes naturally to me and when you combine that with impeccable preparation, you are in excellent hands. Below you will find a few examples of the many sexual assault cases that I have successfully defended. Few sexual assault cases resolve by way of guilty plea and so these examples are trial results.

My Experience Defending Sexual Assaults:

There are many more sexual assault cases that I have successfully defended but have not included here. In my ten years in private practice, I have only lost two sexual assault cases and both were cases involving an employer inappropriately touching an employee. Neither client went to jail and one of the clients escaped without a criminal record. These are difficult cases, hire an experienced lawyer.

Sexual Offences

R v. E (2022, OCJ Brampton)
Facts

The client was charged with voyeurism and breach of undertaking. He had posted a short video of his ex-girlfriend and subsequently after being charged was in contact with her at her request. I was able to convince the crown attorney that the girlfriend was not opposed to the contact and did not want the charges going forward. The client plead guilty to voyeurism and the breach charge was withdrawn and the client received 45 days of house arrest.

R v. L (2022, OCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with 2 counts of indecent act, 1 count of breaking and entering and 1 count of criminal harassment. The client had an alcohol addiction and these allegations arose because he was exposing himself on the next door neighbour’s porch and leaving notes on $50 bills on her door. It was also alleged that he had tried to break in to her front door using a credit card. Following a judicial pre-trial and following some up-front counselling work by my client, it became clear that while this was a very bizarre situation it, was extremely unlikely to repeat itself because the client had moved up north and was having no further contact with the neighbour in question. The client plead guilty to 1 count of indecent act and received probation for 1 year. The crown attorney’s initial position had been 2 years in jail.

R v. N (2022, SCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference. Following the break-up of his marriage, the client’s daughter alleged that he had sexually assaulted her for approximately 6 years. During my cross examination of the daughter and my client’s ex-wife I was able to show that the two of them had conspired to make up these allegations in an effort to force my client to break off the relationship with his new girlfriend and return to the marriage. I was able to show that both the daughter and the mother had threatened consequences to both my client and his new girlfriend if they did not end their relationship. Allegations to the police were made after those threats. The client was found not guilty of all charges and the judge said that while he could not be sure that the mother and daughter had conspired, it sure did look that way.

R v. F (2022, OCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with sexual assault, aggravated assault and 3 counts of assault. He was then later charged with breaching his conditions of release for being in contact with the complainant and commenting to her that the court might see videos of the two of them having sex. Following a series of judicial pre-trials and detailed input from the complainant, it became clear that both parties had significant substance abuse issues and both had been under the influence of drugs during the time of all of the allegations. It was also clear from the complainant’s original statement that the aggravated assault may have been an accident and so that charge was not viable. Ultimately the client plead guilty to 1 count of assault and 1 count of attempting to obstruct justice for talking to the complainant about the case and he received a 30 day conditional sentence (a jail sentence that he served at home under house arrest but was permitted to go to work) followed by 18 months probation. All other charges were withdrawn. The crown attorney’s original position had ben 5 years in jail.

R v. V (2022, SCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with a series of sexual assaults and assaults on his former spouse. It was the defence theory that these complaints were made to assist the complainant in gaining Canadian citizenship as she had been sponsored by the client and it was an arranged marriage. There were also disputes with respect to family jewelry and other money issues that created a potential motive for the complainant to have made these allegations.

The client was well prepared for his testimony and the cross examination of the complainant was thorough and effective and the judge acquitted the client on all charges.

R v. M (2021, OCJ Peterborough)
Facts

Client was charged with internet luring for having contacted and arranging to meet up with a girl who was under aged. Her parents found out and contacted the police. The crown attorney’s position was 18 months in jail. Following a judicial pre-trial and with the assistance of previous case law, the judge agreed to sentence him to 8 months in jail. There was no forensic psychiatry report available because such a report would have done more harm than good to the client; it is imperative that you know everything there is to know before ordering such an assessment. In this case the client was completely up front with me about what he had done in the past that the police were not aware of and so no report was requested.

R v. B (2021, OCJ Toronto)
Facts

Client was charged with two counts of an indecent act for exposing himself on the subway. Client has severe mental health issues and has been under a psychiatrist’s care and is suffering severe depression because his marriage is over. Complication problem for him was that this had happened before, also while in a state of blacked-out drunkenness. Notwithstanding the previous incident, which I had also had withdrawn, the crown attorney agreed to an informal period of mental health diversion in which case the matter was adjourned for an extended period of time to make sure that the client was remaining under psychiatric care and remaining sober and then the charges were withdrawn.

R v. V (2021, OCJ Orangeville)
Facts

Client was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference and the making and distributing of child pornography in relation to his two young children. Client has been going through a bitter divorce in which his ex-wife has been repeatedly doing things to try to get him into trouble and asking allegations against him at every turn. It was our belief that his wife had put the kids up to this and had coached them in what to say. I was able to obtain reports from the Children’s Aid Society in which they confirmed that they had repeatedly cautioned my client’s ex-wife against taking statements from the kids while leading them in what they should say. The OPP Technology Crimes Unit did a full investigation and found there was no evidence of any photos or videos being taken or distributed and the crown attorney ultimately withdrew all charges.

R v. A (2021, OCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with sexual assault after meeting up with a girl he had met and contacted through social media. The incident took place in the back seat of his car. There were credibility issues for both the complainant and my client, although the cross examination of the complainant had gone extremely well and in the end the complainant agreed she did not believe she had been sexually assaulted. The client was found guilty of a simple assault because of something else he had done without the complainant’s express consent and he received a conditional discharge and probation with no criminal record.

R v. N (2021, OCJ Newmarket)
Facts

The client was charged with an indecent act. He had been exposing himself inside his vehicle in a public place and a woman walking by his vehicle saw what he was doing and called the police. I had the client do some up-front counselling and had him assessed by a forensic psychiatrist to show he was not an ongoing risk to the public. I was also able to show to the crown attorney from the complainant’s statement that he was not trying to draw attention to himself but rather she had simply seen this happening. The crown attorney agreed to withdraw the charge and the client signed a peace bond for a period of 12 months.

R v. S (2020, SCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with a series of historical sexual offences in relation to a second cousin who he had been involved in a relationship with for a period of 6 years. He was significantly older than the complainant and while it was consensual, they had had a sexual relationship while the complainant was a minor. The allegations were more than 40 years ago. There was a financial motive on behalf of the complainant that came out during cross examination at the preliminary hearing. But the client had no defence to the fact that she was under-age at the time of some of their sexual activity. Ultimately the sexual assault charges were withdrawn and the client plead guilty to a historical offence called seduction of a female under the age of 18. He received a conditional sentence of 7 months with the first 2 months of that to be served under house arrest with certain exceptions. The crown attorney’s initial position on sentence prior to the preliminary hearing was 7 to 10 years in jail.

R v. S (2020, OCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with a sexual assault. He was travelling on a bus and the complainant alleged that he reached forward in between the seats and grabbed her breast. I met with the crown attorney and it was agreed that the client would do some counselling up-front about appropriate behavior in Canada when travelling on public transit and the charge was withdrawn.

R v. O (2020, OCJ Toronto)
Facts

Client was charged with sexual assault against an employee at the restaurant where he was an owner. Other staff members then provided statements that suggested he had been inappropriate with them. Following a series of judicial pre-trials and with some counselling done up-front the crown attorney agree that he could plead guilty to a simple assault and he received a conditional discharge and probation with no criminal record. The crown attorney had originally wanted 90 days in jail.

R v. M (2020, OCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with an indecent act for having exposed himself several times in the grocery store line-up, pretending that it had been an accident. Client was a very successful banking executive who had lost his job and had become an alcoholic. I provided the crown attorney and the judge with a very favourable report from a forensic psychiatrist and the client had arranged for a new consulting position with one of the big banks and was clearly heading in a positive alcohol-free direction. Client received a conditional discharge and probation for 9 months with no criminal record.

R. v. M. (2020, Peterborough)
Facts

Client was charged with internet luring in relation to a girl who was underage. Client pled guilty for reasons that will remain unmentioned, a forensic assessment was not done and instead I provided case-law to support a sentencing recommendation that I was making for six to nine months in jail, Crown was seeking eighteen months in jail, and the client received a sentence of nine months.

R v. D (2019, OCJ Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with a series of sexual assaults and sexual interference in relation to his niece. The incidents were historical in nature. Following a trial the judge found that while he did not believe my client’s testimony he still found him not guilty because my cross-examination of the complainant brought out far too many inconsistencies. As the judge said in his decision, these inconsistencies are not unexpected when the events took place so long ago but there were far too many of them and as I had pointed out in my submissions and with which the judge agreed, there were over 40 times in which the complainant said “I don’t know” or “I’m not sure” or “I really don’t remember – my memory is really bad”. The judge found that given all these inconsistencies and concerns he could not be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the client was guilty.

R v. N (2019, OCJ Newmarket)
Facts

Client was charged with a sexual assault on a co-worker. Client’s version of the events was that this woman had been interested in him but he was married and not interested in her in that way. He was her supervisor and when she came to him upset about a situation that had arisen, she claimed that he had sexually assaulted her.

Through conversations with the crown attorney and the disclosure to the crown attorney of previous text messages and other online messaging by the complainant, I was able to convince the crown that they had no reasonable prospect of conviction and the charge was withdrawn.

R. v. C. (2019, Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with a sexual assault on a woman at the rooming house where he lived. I was able to convince the Crown that this was not exactly how it was portrayed and encouraged the Crown to get input from the complainant. Ultimately, the charge was withdrawn and the client signed a peace bond.

R. v. A. (2019, Woodstock)
Facts

Client was charged with a series of sexual assaults involving his stepson’s wife. The incidents were quite bizarre in nature, but there was a forty-year age gap between my client and the complainant. We were fairly certain that the stepson would support the client’s defence, but when we found out that was not the case, I negotiated a plea agreement with the Crown in which the client received a house arrest sentence of six months.

R. v. A. (2019, Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with voyeurism for having taken a picture up a woman’s skirt at a store in Mississauga. Client had had a very difficult childhood growing up in a war-torn country, but now had a very good job and had complicated his business degree, had taken extensive counselling and received a conditional discharge.

R. v. B. (2019, Brampton)
Facts

Client is a massage therapist who was charged with a sexual assault of a patient. Complainant and his wife were cross-examined, it became very clear that they were not telling the truth about a variety of things, complainant’s wife was confronted with text messages that she had sent to my client, wishing him a Merry Christmas after her husband had told her about one of the alleged sexual assaults. Needless to say, this made no sense and the client was found not guilty.

R. v. B. (2018, Brampton)
Facts

Client charged with sexual assault in relation to a neighbour. I was able to arrange independent legal advice for the complainant who provided an affidavit to the Crown indicating that the events were actually consensual, and she had contacted the police at the insistence of her husband. Charges were withdrawn.

R. v. B. (2018, Milton)
Facts

Client was intoxicated and charged with sexual assault on a fourteen-year-old girl outside of a coffee shop. Client received some individual counselling and had a forensic risk assessment done and was ultimately allowed to plead guilty to assault rather than sexual assault and received a period of probation not a jail sentence.

R. v. C. (2018, Brampton)
Facts

Client charged with sexual assaults on both his biological daughter and his stepdaughter. Client did not dispute the allegations and did not want either of his daughters to have to testify. He did however with some of the facts, I was able to get the Crown to agree on a change to some of the factual allegations and he ultimately pled guilty and received a sentence of four years in jail, rather than the ten years that the Crown was originally asking for.

R. v. K. (2017, Brampton)
Facts

Client was facing the potential of sexual assault charges, provided the client with advice on giving a statement to police, client provided a statement to police and no charges were laid.

R. v. D. (2017, Brampton)
Facts

Client was charged with two counts of indecent act for having exposed himself in a public park. Client had been heavily intoxicated at the time. Client received individual counselling both for substance abuse and appropriate behaviour and ultimately received a conditional discharge from the judge with no criminal record.

2016 Sexual Offences
2 out of 2 cases resulted in no criminal record.
1 conditional discharge.
1 absolute discharge.

R. v. C. - Voyeurism
Background

Client had attended at a clothing retailer. He went into the change-room and waited for females to go into the adjacent change-room, at which time he would place his cell phone underneath the stall in an attempt to take video of the females changing. He was charged with voyeurism.

Strategy

I arranged for my client to attend private counselling which he took extremely seriously, and before attending court he had seen the counsellor over thirty times. He was also assessed by a forensic psychiatrist who found him to be extremely regretful over his actions and was motivated to change. These reports were provided to the Crown, as well as character reference letters.

Decision/Outcome

The Crown ultimately agreed to a conditional discharge if my client pled guilty. The judge was impressed by all of the reports and granted the client a conditional discharge. The Crown's initial position had been 6-9 months in jail.

R. v. B. - Indecent Act
Background

Client was heavily intoxicated and exposed himself to other people who took pictures of him doing so and contacted the police. Client had no memory of even being at the place where the incident took place due to his level of intoxication and only remembered being at the police station.

Strategy

I had the client participate in counselling not only for his apparent alcohol problem, but also for other personal issues that he was experiencing. Additionally I had him formally assessed to prove that he was not a risk to the public.

Decision/Outcome

Client plead guilty; the judge agreed that this was completely out of character for him, and that he had done everything possible to address the issues that gave rise to this. He was given an absolute discharge.

2014-2015 Sexual Offences **9 cases**
All 9 cases resulted in no criminal record

R. v. V. (2015 Brampton) - Sexual Assault
Background

Elderly client was alleged to have inappropriately touched a 15-year-old girl at a bus stop. Client exhibited strange and erratic behaviour both during and after the incident, and during the police's interrogation of him.

Strategy

To demonstrate that this incident was incredibly out of character for my client, and at the request of the Crown to have an assessment performed by a psychiatrist to demonstrate that such an incident was out of character for my client.

Decision/Outcome

Received an absolute discharge after the Court received a report at my request from a forensic psychiatrist, in which it was said that given his age and his impression of what he had learned from this process there was no need for any ongoing monitoring by the court.

R. v. D. (2015 Brampton) - Indecent Act
Background

Client was charged with indecent act after the complainant alleged he exposed himself in his car to her.

Strategy

To convince the Crown that based on the complainant's statement, which did not include any suggestion that he was doing anything with his penis other than it might have been exposed, that the offence of indecent act with which he was charged was not made out. The Crown was reluctant to agree with my assessment, but on balance agreed that if he would sign a peace bond to have no contact with the complainant the charge would be withdrawn.

Decision/Outcome

Charges were withdrawn.

R. v. F. - Indecent Act x2 (2015 Brampton)
Background

Client was charged with two counts of indecent act after multiple incidents with neighbours where she exposed her genital area.

Strategy

To persuade the Crown that there was some misunderstanding, but also that there were some mental health concerns and that this was a case that more properly should be dealt with by mental health diversion, which is what happened.

Decision/Outcome

Client was placed under the care of a psychiatrist. The case was adjourned for six months to allow my client to take the care that was directed. Charges were ultimately withdrawn.

R. v. O. (2013-2015 New Market) - Sexual Assault and Sexual Interference
Background

My client was charged with five separate incidents of improper touching of the daughter of family friends. The Crown was seeking a lengthy custodial sentence.

Strategy

We conducted a preliminary hearing in which the complainant was cross-examined at length about her memory and about the lack of opportunity for this to have happened because she says the incidents occurred when there were between twenty to thirty people in the house where these incidents supposedly occurred. I had interviewed some of the other children that were around the same age or older as the complainant, and they were all of the belief that there would not have been an opportunity for this to have happened. I cross-examined the complainant about the lack of opportunity, and she had no explanation for how this could have happened with so many people around.

Decision/Outcome

A trial date was set, and at the start of the trial the accused was arraigned. The Crown called no evidence, and my client was acquitted of all charges.

R. v. B.M. - Indecent Act
Background

Client was charged with indecent act after he had received a massage from a registered massage therapist.

Strategy

I was able to persuade the Crown that the complainant in all likelihood had misinterpreted and overreacted to the actions of the client. The client agreed to attend counselling and following the counselling sessions the charges were withdrawn.

Decision/Outcome

charges were withdrawn

R. v. L.Y. - Indecent Act
Background

My client had a medial condition that resulted in him having an inability to control his bladder. A truck driver thought that he was exposing himself in his vehicle.

Strategy

I convinced the Crown that the truck driver had misinterpreted my client's actions, and he was granted diversion.

Decision/Outcome

charges withdrawn

R. v. C.D. - Indecent Act
Background

Mr. D. was alleged to have been exposing himself while watching a pornographic video in his car outside of an adult video shop, which police observed and charged him with indecent act.

Strategy

I persuaded the Crown that based on the observations made by the police, it was open to infer that either my client was committing an indecent act or he was simply sitting in his car with his hands in his lap watching a video on his phone. Mr. D agreed to attend for counselling, both individually and with his wife.

Decision/Outcome

Following his attendance at counselling, charges were withdrawn

R. v. B.R. - Indecent Act and Mischief
Background

Mr R. had some issues that were more indicative of the need for counselling than punishment.

Strategy

The issues that were addressed by the counsellor made it clear that the neighbours misinterpreted Mr. R's intentions.

Decision/Outcome

After completing several months of counselling, the Crown entered a stay of proceedings.

R. v. I.M. - Sexual Assault
Background

This was a complicated situation involving the client, the complainant, and the complainant's husband.

Strategy

I was able to arrange for independent legal advice for the complainant. Her counsel then advised the Crown that her version of events was not complete and when the police officer asked her if her actions had been consensual, she did not answer with the degree of certainty that she ought to have. After independent counsel spoke with her, she made it clear that she wanted no part of the criminal prosecution and that her actions on the night in question had in fact been with her consent.

Decision/Outcome

Crown withdrew the charges.

2013 and older cases

R. v. S. (Brampton Court, May 2013)
Background

Client and his neighbour and neighbour's husband were socializing at client's house, when neighbour's husband suggested they watch porn. Following this there was a series of altercations between the neighbour and her husband, the husband left, and the neighbour and client stayed in the house together. Following that night, neighbour clearly regretted her actions and called police, client was charged with forcible confinement, sexual assault, assault, and mischief.

Strategy

To prove that the neighbour was not telling the whole truth and was simply regretful of her actions, and that anything that had happened between client and the neighbour was consensual. Also, to prove that there was DNA evidence on the neighbour not of my client.

Decision/Outcome

All charges were withdrawn.

R. v. R. (Brampton Court, September 2012)
Background

Client was found looking into the windows of homes in a neighbouring area, with a cell phone is his hand. Client confessed he had been looking into windows in hopes of seeing someone naked, of which he would take pictures to fuel his pornography addiction.

Strategy

To convince the Crown and judge that this incident was a direct result of my client's addiction to pornography and mental strains in his life, including confidence issues and intimacy issues emerging from his childhood, and personal and financial strains. Additionally, to prove that my client was deeply remorseful for his actions and working towards bettering himself, by providing reports from a psychologist and showing evidence he had been seeing a social worker for an extended period of time in order to rehabilitate himself.

Decision/Outcome

Client ultimately pled guilty to voyeurism, and received a conditional discharge and probation for 9 months.

R. v. D. (Brampton Superior Court, February 2012)
Background

Client was charged with gang sexual assault after he and a friend met a woman at a local bar and returned to her residence, upon which they had a sexual encounter with her. The woman later complained that she had been raped by both individuals. The client had stolen some of the woman's personal items and had urinated in her fridge.

Strategy

The client had to admit and plead guilty to the theft of the personal items and the mischief charge for urinating in her fridge, because there was overwhelming evidence that he had done both of these, and if he did not admit to those, he would have lost credibility when testifying on the charge of sexual assault. At trial for the sexual assault, I was able to cross-examine the complainant's best friend in such a manner that resulted in her advising the court that in her opinion, there had been no sexual assault, and that her friend had simply made this up, out of feelings of regret. I was also able to discredit the complainant and demonstrate that her version not only did not make sense but that her memory was full of "convenient" gaps and blank moments.

Decision/Outcome

The client was found not guilty of the sexual assault. Sentencing on the charges he pled guilty to had been adjourned while we waited for the decision on the trial. He then received a suspended sentence and probation for the theft and mischief charge. He had originally been facing a sentence of 3 years on the sexual assault. At sentencing for the theft and mischief, the Crown sought a sentence of 30 days in jail.

R. v. T. (Brampton Court, July 2010)
Background

Following a Peel Regional Police undercover investigation through the Yahoo! Chat and Yahoo! Messenger services, my client was charged with internet luring. Upon his arrest, a search warrant was issued for his residence, during which large amounts of marijuana were discovered, resulting in my client being charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking.

Strategy

To ensure that my client took the situation seriously, and that he got counseling both from his family doctor and a recommended counselor. I also collected a packet of character references for my client, and effectively demonstrated to the judge that my client was now a valued employee at his place of work.

Decision/Outcome

Although the Crown was seeking one year in jail, I was able to provide the judge with previous decisions and convince him of some extenuating circumstances; client received a sentence of only 45 days to be served on weekends.

R. V. M. (Brampton Sup. Court, March 2010)
Background

Client charged with a sexual assault on his girlfriend’s friend on a night when everyone had been drinking heavily. The complainant herself was so drunk she did not remember what she had done.

Strategy

Cross-examine the complainant extensively to show a severe lack of credibility and reliability so that the Crown would realize they had no prospect of conviction.

Decision/Outcome

Following a judicial pre-trial in Superior Court, the Crown withdrew the charges.

R. v. S.(Toronto Ct., February 2010)
Background

The client was charged with sexually assaulting two women that he worked with. They alleged that he had touched them inappropriately on several occasions at the work place and that he was often making inappropriate sexual remarks. The client had previously been found guilty of assaulting a co-worker at the same work location. The client was a supervisor to the people who were making the complaint.

Strategy

It was our theory that these women did not like the client and were making these complaints knowing that he would get fired because of the previous incident. We would try to show that their statements did not make sense and that this was a fabrication.

Decision/Outcome

Just before the trial started, the Crown advised me that she would be calling as a witness the girl who had previously complained. The client had pled guilty to that incident and so her testimony made the chances of success remote. The Crown then offered probation if the client pleaded guilty to one count of sexual assault. If the client were found guilty of a sexual assault while being in a supervisory capacity, he would have faced a minimum jail sentence. The Crown and I met with a Judge in chambers and the Judge agreed that probation was appropriate and the case was completed.

R. v. I. (Brampton Ct., December 2009)
Background

The client was charged with masturbating in his car. It was alleged that while he had his penis exposed, he called a woman over and "asked her for directions". She freaked out, wrote down the licence plate number of his vehicle and called the police. After his arrest, the client admitted to police that it was him.

Strategy

The client, for employment purposes, needed to avoid a criminal record. I had a "risk assessment" done by a Psychiatrist from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto. The opinion of the doctor was that the client was of "low risk" to re-offend. I instructed the client to attend for counselling and get in as many sessions as possible. He attended weekly sessions with the counsellor and took the counselling very seriously.

Decision/Outcome

I showed that report to the Crown Attorney. She was impressed with the report and with the counselling that he had done. She agreed that the client could plead guilty to a charge of Mischief and receive a Conditional Discharge. The Judge agreed and the client avoided a criminal record.

R. v. B. (Orangeville Ct., November 2009)
Background

The client was charged with having sexual intercourse with his sister when she was 6 years old and he was 13 years old. The client was 22 years old at the time of arrest.

Strategy

The client denied having sex with his sister but he did admit to touching her inappropriately and so I needed to convince the Crown to allow him to plead guilty on the basis that he touched her but did not have sex with her. I conducted a pre-trial with a Judge and the Judge was strongly encouraging the Crown to agree to the facts I was suggesting.

Decision/Outcome

The Crown agreed to the less serious facts but still asked the Judge to send the client to jail for 6 months. I told the Judge that based on what the client had admitted, and his age at the time of the offence, probation was appropriate and the Judge agreed.

R. v. G. (Brampton Ct., October 2009)
Background

The client was charged with two different sexual assaults on two different women at two different locations on the same day, but at two different times. He was accused of raping a woman who lived at the same rooming house that he lived at during the afternoon while they were drinking together. He later went to a local bar and went into the women’s washroom and was reaching under the stall at a woman who was using the toilet. He was alleged to have made sexual comments to her. She screamed and he ran out of the bar. He was arrested and denied bail.

Strategy

It was decided that the Crown would probably not be able to prove either case and so trial dates were set for both. It was our position that the rooming house incident was consensual and not a sexual assault. With respect to the incident at the bar, I provided case law to the Crown to show that in law what he did was not a sexual assault.

Decision/Outcome

The woman who complained about the sexual assault in the rooming house did not show up for trial. The Crown tried to argue for an adjournment of the trail. I opposed that request and told the Judge that it was clear that the woman was not interested in coming to court. The Judge agreed; the adjournment request was denied and the charge was dismissed. With respect to the sexual assault charge at the bar, the Crown reviewed the case law that I provided and agreed that it was not a sexual assault. The client pleaded guilty to the offence of mischief and received a sentence of 1 day in jail.

R. v. H. Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton Ct., 2009
Background

Complainant alleged that her brother-in-law had sexually assaulted her by grabbing her and groping her on two separate occasions -- once in her home and once in a public place. Mr. H. insisted he was innocent and denied any inappropriate touching of his brother’s wife.

Strategy

To show that the complainant had fabricated the whole story in order to discredit the family. She had also accused her mother-in-law and her husband of assault. The marriage was at an end and she wanted revenge.

Decision/Outcome

Approximately 10 minutes into my cross-examination of the complainant, I had caught her in several clear lies and the Crown asked for a break. He then said he would invite the judge to acquit my client if he would sign a peace bond. The client was reluctant to sign the peace bond given how well the cross-examination was going but he agreed to sign and the charges were withdrawn.

R. v. B. (Orangeville Ct., November 2009)
Background

The client was charged with having sexual intercourse with his sister when she was 6 years old and he was 13 years old. The client was 22 years old at the time of arrest.

Strategy

The client denied having sex with his sister but he did admit to touching her inappropriately and so I needed to convince the Crown to allow him to plead guilty on the basis that he touched her but did not have sex with her. I conducted a pre-trial with a Judge and the Judge was strongly encouraging the Crown to agree to the facts I was suggesting.

Decision/Outcome

The Crown agreed to the less serious facts but still asked the Judge to send the client to jail for 6 months. I told the Judge that based on what the client had admitted, and his age at the time of the offence, probation was appropriate and the Judge agreed.

R. v. R.E. Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton Ct., 2008
Background

Mr. R. was charged with sexually assaulting a co-worker after hours at the office. The complainant alleged that Mr. R. had kissed her against her will, forcibly pulled down her pants and tried to rape her. My client admitted that they had made out at the office after hours but insisted that she was a willing participant and that the encounter was completely consensual.

Strategy

I needed to either get the complainant to admit that she was consenting or show that her testimony regarding no consent was simply not believable.

Decision/Outcome

The judge not only found the client not guilty but went on to say that he believed Mr. R. was innocent! An accused person only needs to raise a reasonable doubt in the judge’s mind in order to be found not guilty; it is very rare for a judge to actually say he believed the accused person to have been innocent. During cross-examination, I got the complainant to admit that she was attracted to my client and that she had made that clear to him. She also admitted that the kissing was mutual and that she never told him that she was not agreeing to what was happening. In fact, she admitted that her actions at the time would have led Mr. R. to believe that she was a willing participant.

R. v. Y.O. Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton Ct., 2008
Background

This young man who was 15 years old at the time, was alleged to have pulled down the pants of two other boys, ages 9 and 10. It was further alleged that he grabbed the penis of one of the boys and made several sexually inappropriate comments at the same time. The client denied any wrong-doing.

Strategy

To show the judge that these boys had a motive to fabricate and to illicit a large number of inconsistencies between their versions which would raise a reasonable doubt. The client would not be testifying because his version of events was just not plausible. This made my job all the more difficult because I would have to discredit two young witnesses without providing contradictory testimony.

Decision/Outcome

The client was acquitted of all charges. Not only did the boys contradict themselves during cross-examination but the one boy agreed with me that the other boy not only did not like my client but that he had told lies about him in the past in order to get him in trouble. This second boy also agreed that he would have seen any touching of the other boy’s penis because he was right there and since he did not see it, he did not believe it actually happened. This boy also agreed that all the boys in the neighborhood at that time were playing a game called "Pantzing" where they would pull one another’s pants down. When asked if he thought this was all my client had done and the rest was just made by the other boy to get my client in trouble, he agreed.

R. v. S.A. Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton Ct., 2007
Background

Client who was over 40 years old, was charged with a Sexual Assault on a 15-year old girl. She complained that he had taken her into a parking garage where he tried to get her to perform oral sex on him and that he pulled her top down. Client admitted that this had happened but said that she wanted money and he was not prepared to pay because she had previously provided this service without asking for any money.

Strategy

Get the complainant to admit that there was a previous relationship between her and the client and that she had lied about her age by telling the client she was 19. Then the client would testify and tell the judge that she was a willing participant.

Decision/Outcome

Client was acquitted of all charges. The complainant admitted lying about her age and agreed that she often called my client on his cell phone. She also admitted that she had asked my client for money. Client was believed when he testified that she was a willing participant who had done this before.

R. v. G. Ontario Superior Court of Justice, 2007
Background

Mr. G. was charged with incest on both his daughters over a 6 year period when his daughters were between the ages of 6 and 11. Mr. G. was adamant that he was innocent and the Crown was seeking a jail sentence of 10 years in the penitentiary.

Strategy

I would need to attack the credibility and reliability of both daughters in such a way that would not anger the Judge or make them emotional to the point where they are unable to testify without repeated breaks. I would also need to establish a motive for them both to fabricate and an opportunity for them to do so. I would also need to repeatedly cross-examine the client at my office so that he would be ready to testify in the trial. The trial would take place in front of a Superior Court Judge sitting without a jury because we felt a jury might be too influenced by the allegations.

Decision/Outcome

The client was acquitted of all charges. During my cross-examination of the girls, I was able to get them to admit that they wanted to live together (they had different mothers and were not living together) and that they would do or say anything to make that happen. The one daughter also admitted that she was familiar with the sexual assault complaint process because she had been previously abused by an uncle. She admitted telling her sister how it worked and they both agreed that the one daughter who had been living with her father no longer wanted to do so because he had moved to a place where she had no friends. They both admitted that they believed they would be able to live together after these complaints were made. I was also able to show that there was no opportunity for the assaults to have taken place where the girls said they had. Their versions were not making sense and the girls ultimately admitted that as well. The client did an excellent job when he testified and his evidence was believed.

R. v. Y.S. Ontario Court of Justice, Brampton Ct., 2006
Background

This 15-year-old boy was charged with raping his 7-year-old nephew by sticking his penis in his nephew’s anus on 3 separate occasions, once outside at a school and twice at home in the family washroom. The client denied all allegations and said he loved his nephew as his own brother.

Strategy

No family member could think of a possible motive to fabricate on the part of the young boy and so we had to show that there was no realistic opportunity for the assaults to have taken place. We called all the family members to explain to the judge how small the apartment was and how the girls were always involved in the bathing process and the client would never have been alone in the shower area with his nephew. We then took photos of the school yard where the other assault was supposed to have taken place so that we could show the judge that there were houses all around with a clear view to where the boy said he was when he was raped. And finally, we would need convincing testimony from the client.

Decision/Outcome

Client acquitted of all charges. The judge believed my client and all the family members who made it clear that there was no opportunity for this to have happened in the apartment. The judge also found my cross-examination of the nephew regarding the school assault to be very persuasive. I had the nephew explain the position he was in when his uncle was putting his penis inside his anus and his testimony made no sense; it was physically impossible for the assault to have happened the way he said.

*Fill out this form for free,
Immediate, Case Evaluation

(Free case evaluation available for potential clients only)
or call 905‑366‑4354
Email: