Case Analysis : V Hutchinson

876 Words4 Pages
In the Supreme Court case R. V Hutchinson is a legal case where Craig Jaret Hutchinson was charged with aggravated sexual assault in the lower court after the complainant had consented to have sexual intercourse but wanted Hutchinson to wear a condom. However, Hutchinson poked holes in the condom unknown to the complainant. This resulted in pregnancy. In the Supreme Court case, the file says, “Mr. Hutchinson was charged with aggravated sexual assault. The complainant said that she did not consent to unprotected sex. The trial judge agreed and convicted Mr. Hutchinson of sexual assault (2011 NSSC 361, 311 N.S.R. (2d) 1) (Supreme Court, 2014).” This quote from the supreme court judgment is explaining how Mr. Hutchinson was convicted of aggravated sexual assault under the criminal code Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, ss. 265(3) (c), 273.1(1). This section of the code focuses on the meaning of consent and when consent has not been obtained from the complainant. Consent can be obtained through multiple ways such as verbal agreement. However, consent cannot be attained when one person is forceful, uses threat or fear to manipulate the other party, fraud, or abuse of power. Hutchinson is appealing the charge of a to a lesser charge. In the court document, it states, [14] The main issue here is whether the Crown proved that the complainant did not consent to the sexual touching by the appellant. Did the condom sabotage, as the majority of the Court of Appeal held,
Get Access