WARNING: This story includes disturbing details regarding allegations of sexual assault involving minors.
He had just turned 13, while she was nearly 12.
They met through social media and arranged a meetup in middle school, which led to sexual contact. Following this, they both expressed their feelings with an “I love you.”
However, just two days later, she accused him of sexual assault, a claim he refuted.
The age of consent
The trial that ensued concluded with the boy being acquitted in a case that raises critical questions about sexual interactions among minors and the nuances of Canada’s age of consent laws.
Details of this case were revealed in a provincial court ruling issued in July, which has only recently become accessible online. For privacy reasons, the court’s location and the city where the incident took place—somewhere in British Columbia—have been withheld in compliance with the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
According to the provincial court’s ruling, the two began communicating on social media in April 2023. He was 13, and she was 11 at the time, describing their relationship as ‘sort of dating.’ (Getty Images/iStockphoto)
In Canada, the legal age for consent is set at 16, although individuals under 18 are unable to consent to sexual activity with someone in a position of authority or in situations involving exploitation.
To address contemporary societal dynamics, Parliament has established exceptions to the consent laws, allowing for “close in age” situations where the accused is near in age to the alleged victim.
According to the Criminal Code, individuals who are 14 or 15 may consent to sexual activity with someone up to five years older, while those who are 12 or 13 can consent to sexual relations with someone no more than two years older. Children younger than 12 are unable to provide consent for sexual activity.
In this particular B.C. case, the boy contended that he believed the girl to be older than 11.
Judge Danny Sudeyko acknowledged that while the “non-consensual sexual contact” claimed by the girl “may have occurred,” the boy’s “clear” testimony, coupled with text messages and other evidence, created reasonable doubt regarding the occurrence of a sexual assault.
Regarding consent, despite the girl being 11, the judge determined that the prosecution did not successfully demonstrate that the boy was aware she was under 12. Their ages were close enough that the accused could claim he believed she was old enough to consent.
‘Sort of dating’
The court ruling indicated that the two “connected via social media” in late April 2023, attending different middle schools.
He was in Grade 7, while she was in Grade 6.
The two met in a location between a recreation center and another building, leading to much of their interactions being recorded by CCTV cameras. (CBC News)
“In addition to extensive ‘chatting’ on social media, [the boy and the girl] met a couple of times with others present and were briefly alone on one or two occasions,” Sudeyko noted.
“They shared kisses. [The girl] referred to this as ‘sort of dating’ but ‘not really official.’
The two met at the end of May 2023 in an area situated between a recreation center and another building, where much of what transpired next was captured on CCTV.
According to the ruling, during their first encounter, they “kissed and embraced,” and “[the boy] also touched or put his lips or mouth on [the girl’s] breast and touched her buttocks.”
“The video of that initial sexual encounter was largely recorded and was shown in court,” Sudeyko wrote, adding that the footage captured the girl noticing the camera’s presence.
“This realization was also documented by the CCTV, with [the girl] pointing out the camera above them to [the boy], after which they appeared to experience some embarrassment and moved away.”
‘Forceful in his conduct’
Their next meeting took place in a stairwell that was only partially monitored by CCTV, which recorded them entering, exiting, and “standing together on the stairs while looking at their phones.”
Out of view of the camera, the girl alleged that the boy exposed himself, pulled down her tights, and “pushed or slapped his penis against the cheek of her exposed buttocks, skin to skin.”
The provincial court’s ruling was delivered in July but has only recently been made public. Both the court’s location and the city where the incident occurred have been redacted. (Peter Scobie/CBC)
“[The girl] claims that aside from some consensual kissing and hugging, [the boy] acted forcefully towards her. She stated that when she wanted to leave, he insisted she stay,” the judge stated.
“[The boy] asserts that he did not compel [the girl] to enter or remain in the stairwell, claiming that all sexual contact was consensual.”
The ruling indicated that “[The boy said the girl] expressed ‘I love you’ as she departed, and he reciprocated”—a statement the girl confirmed during cross-examination after initially providing a different account to the police.
The following day, the girl’s friends suggested the boy was unfaithful, sharing a video of him with other girls. He denied the accusation.
The day after their encounter, the girl confided in her grandmother, who then took her to report the incident at a police station.
“The officer conducting the interview did not seem to consider her age or her inability to consent, focusing instead on the issue of subjective consent during the encounter,” the judge noted.
“There was no mention of her age or whether she had informed [the boy] of her age or grade. However, when asked by the police officer about [the boy’s age], the girl mentioned he had ‘just turned 13.’
In contrast, the question of the girl’s age—and the boy’s perception of it—was central to the trial.
‘Close-in-age’ exception
Despite Judge Sudeyko indicating that the Crown did not prove the boy was “either reckless or willfully blind to a lack of consent from [the girl],” prosecutors contended that he did not take reasonable measures to determine her age.
While neither the boy nor the girl “directly communicated or discussed their respective ages or grades,” Sudeyko expressed belief in the boy’s assertion that the girl claimed she was older than 11.
Nonetheless, the prosecution argued that the “close-in-age” exception should not be applicable when the complainant is under 12—the minimum age considered in the consent laws.
Judge Sudeyko emphasized that the law was designed to prevent an accused from engaging in sexual activity with someone they “knew or believed to be 11 years old.”
This would not pertain to a 13-year-old who “genuinely” thought the girl he encountered online was “at least 12.”
If you are in immediate danger or feel unsafe, please call 911. For assistance in your area, you can find crisis lines and local services through the Ending Sexual Violence Association of Canada database.
Tag: rewrite-pending
