SELECTED CASE LAW
ONTARIO:
In 2013 ONSC 5243, Mr. C filmed a sexual encounter with the complainant without her knowledge. Mr. C was convicted of assault, assault with a weapon, mischief, voyeurism, and a breach of probation. On appeal, the appellant argued that the trial judge failed to conduct an analysis on whether the Crown proved that the recording happened “in circumstances that give rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy”. The Crown argued the issue was not raised at trial and that the recording happened in a private dwelling place, which would give rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy. The Appeal court found that although the trial judge did not specifically address this component of the offence in her findings, it is not necessary to address an issue not raised at trial, and that evidence supported a finding of this element beyond a reasonable doubt because the sexual activity “did not take place in a public place but in Mr. Coombs’ bedroom in his private residence.”[1] The appeal was dismissed.
[1] 2013 ONSC 5243, at para 45.
Criminal Offence(s): Voyeurism