Her Majesty the Queen v. C.J.
(Manitoba) (Criminal) (As of Right)
(Publication ban in case) (Certain information not available to the public)
Criminal law - Evidence - Assessment - Whether the trial judge unfairly required the respondent to support his conclusion that the complainant was angry with him - Whether the Court of Appeal unduly interfered with the trial judge’s assessment of the respondent’s credibility.
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
C.J., a seventeen-year-old boy, was convicted of one count of sexual interference and one count of invitation to sexual touching. The complainant, a six-year-old girl, alleged that C.J. had invited her to touch him inappropriately and had inappropriately touched her while they were at the park. C.J. appealed his conviction on the basis that the trial judge had misapprehended the evidence. A majority of the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial. In its view, the trial judge had made significant errors in assessing C.J.’s credibility. Finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge’s assessment, Pfuetzner J.A. would have dismissed the appeal,
- Date modified: