Ontario Criminal

Sexual Offences

Sexual assault
Young complainant was credible witness

Trial of accused on charges of one count of sexual assault and one count of touching person under 14 years of age for sexual purpose. Offences were alleged to have occurred between November of 2009 and May of 2010. Female victim, named AD, was three years old at time of incidents, as she was born in August 2006. Accused was 35 years old when he was alleged to have committed offences and he was currently 39. At time of offences accused was in domestic relationship with woman named KK who was best friend of victim’s mother JB. Despite their common law relationship KK and accused occupied separate premises. AD and JB slept over at KK’s unit on many occasions. In May 2010 AD made spontaneous disclosure about things that accused did to her. On August 12, without prompting, AD made anatomically correct drawing of accused’s penis and testicles and drawing also showed something coming out of penis. She also provided further details of accused’s conduct. AD went to police on August 14 and AD provided video statement to police on August 15, 2010. AD testified that incidents happened when she and her mother slept over at KK’s home when everyone else was asleep. Accused convicted. Despite her young age AD had remarkable ability to remember specific details about these incidents. Her version of incidents never wavered at any point in time. AD was credible witness and, having made this finding, accused’s claim that he did not commit offences was rejected.

R. v. Bissonnette (Jun. 10, 2014, Ont. S.C.J., D. Cornell J., File No. null) 119 W.C.B. (2d) 426.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?