Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

 

                                     IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

                                              Citation: R. v. D.S.W., 2006 NSSC 231

 

                                                                                                                                  Date: 20060912

                                                                                                               Docket: “CR”S.AR. 225846

                                                                                                                   Registry: Annapolis Royal

 

Between:

                                                            Her Majesty The Queen

                                                                                                                                                 Plaintiff

                                                                             v.

                                                                             

                                                                       D. S. W.

                                                                                                                                             Defendant

 

 

                                                                LIBRARY HEADING

 

 

Judge:             The Honourable Justice Allan P. Boudreau

 

Heard:                        March 20,2006 in Annapolis Royal

 

Written Decision:       September 12, 2006                                       

 

Subject:                       Criminal Law - Burden of Proof - Proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Summary:         D. S. W. is charged that at or near Springfield, in the County of Annapolis, Province of Nova Scotia, between the 1st day of March, 2000 and the 31st day of March, 2000, did commit a sexual assault on F. S., contrary to Section 271(a) of the Criminal Code of Canada. The one incident which forms the basis for the charge is alleged to have occurred when the complainant was aged twelve and Mr. W. was aged eighteen.  They are now eighteen and twenty‑four years of age respectively.  As in the great majority of cases such as these, the allegation arises when only the complainant and the defendant were present.  The complainant was living at home with her father and Mr. W. was living at home with his mother at the time of the allegation.

 

Issues:                        Credibility and the burden of proof.

 

Result:                        Found complainant not sufficiently credible to form basis of conviction.                                                   Applied R. v. W.D. and found in favour of accused on parts 2 and 3 of the

R. v. W.D. tests.  Acquitted.

 


 

 

 

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.                     QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.