TWO PROGRAMS: Vitiated Consent in Sexual Assault Cases: Abuse of Trust, Power and Authority AND Adult Sentences under the Youth Criminal Justice Act: The Two-Stage Test for Maturity and Accountability

Vitiated Consent in Sexual Assault Cases: Abuse of Trust, Power and Authority 

Georgina Pollard examines when apparent agreement to sexual activity does not amount to consent in law, focusing on abuse of a position of trust, power or authority. She distinguishes the complainant’s subjective agreement from circumstances in which the Criminal Code provides that no consent is obtained, including incapacity, agreement expressed by someone else, and refusal or withdrawal. 

The presentation compares the exercise of authority under section 265(3)(d) with abuse of trust, power or authority under section 273.1(2)(c). It explains why the Crown must prove that misuse of the position induced the sexual activity, rather than rely on the relationship alone. A pastoral authority case and a hypothetical involving a spiritual leader and an adult congregant illustrate how the issue can arise.

Adult Sentences under the Youth Criminal Justice Act: The Two-Stage Test for Maturity and Accountability 

Matt Hodgson examines when an adult sentence may be imposed on a young person under the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Using two Supreme Court of Canada decisions that reached different outcomes, he explains the two-stage test: whether the Crown can rebut the presumption of diminished moral blameworthiness beyond a reasonable doubt, and, if so, whether a youth sentence would be long enough to hold the young person accountable. 

The presentation considers developmental maturity, the seriousness of the offence, rehabilitation and the available youth sentences. It also reviews further cases involving trauma and developmental limitations. Crown and defence checklists address the evidence needed at each stage, including how to present a concrete youth-sentence alternative.