Case Study #1: Judge Ignores Major Inconsistencies
A man was accused of historical sexual abuse against a child while he was a minor and was tried in a youth court as a result. The complainant was an adult at the time of the complaint and her evidence mainly relied on the inference that she had a bed wetting problem as a result of ongoing sexual abuse. It was a judge-only trial. The appeal panel found the trial judge failed to resolve major inconsistencies when accepting the account of the complainant as true. My discussion on this case is in the video below.
The judge's reasons are here: http://canlii.ca/t/gsjcl
.Case Study #2: Consistency Does Not Equal Corroboration, Therefore is Not Proof the Claim is True
A photographer was accused of sexual assaulting a young woman after engaging in a model shoot at his condo/studio after meeting on a social networking app. The woman had sent an anonymous email to the police the next morning and he was arrested 14 months later. The trial judge incorrectly used that email, in the absence of any other material evidence, as corroborative evidence of a prior consistent statement and convicted Zou based solely on the testimony of the accuser. Mr Zou claimed she had made the false accusation because he had rebuffed her sexual advances toward him. My discussion on this case is in the video below.
The judge's reasons are here: http://canlii.ca/t/gx8t
Leave a Reply.
"Clary Jaxon" takes a critical look at how current social theories and the efforts to instill them compare to the reality of actual social conditions. With a focus on Canadian issues. Check out the STW YouTube channel.