SELECTED CASE LAW
ONTARIO:
2011 ONCJ 464
In 2011 ONCJ 464, concerns two teenage boys (RO and LT) charged with sexually assaulting and forcibly confining two teenage girls (SS and KW). For a period of time, the four teens engaged in sexually explicit conversations over social media, including text messages that indicated SS and KW were willing to have sex. The offenders made arrangements to pick up the victims and take them to RO’s home. Both SS and KW stated that they were sexually assaulted at RO’s home. A considerable number of text messages sent before, potentially during and immediately after the incidents in RO’s home were filed at trial.
The Crown argues that the complainants were just living in a world of text talk and that just because they texted that they were willing to participate in sexual activity with the boys doesn’t mean that they actually intended to follow through. However, there is clear and overwhelming evidence which establishes that the two complainants were not just talking about having sex. They intended and went to [RO’s] residence that night to have sex. They planned for it, dressed for it, drove to the residence, and then confirmed their continuing intention to participate in sexual activity after they entered the residence and met all three boys, including [RO’s] This is clear from [A’s] text “I told them I would so I will”, and her texts describing [RO’s] as the cutest and telling [B] that “mine is better than yours.”
The Court was troubled by the fact that both complainants had their cell phones on hand and were seemingly texting throughout their assaults. The Court wrote that, “There is no credible evidence to explain why the complainants did not ask for help, either from each other, or from B’s mother, or from the police.” Having found the girls’ testimony unreliable, the Court acquitted RO and LT of all charges.
Criminal Offence(s): Sexual Assault