Decision on Monday in sexual assault trial
TEDITOR’S NOTE: This article contains graphic sexual content. Reader discretion is highly advised. he fate of an Oliver man alleged to have sexually abused a young boy is now in the hands of a Supreme Court Justice. The testimony of the Oliver teen, who recalled alleged sexual abuse by a man 10 years his senior, was the main talking point during closing arguments from both Crown counsel John Swanson and defence counsel Don Skogstad, Friday in B.C. Supreme Court in Penticton.
The man, who can only be referred to as T.B. due to a court-imposed publication ban, is charged with sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching and sexual assault between June 2011 and August 2012.
The accused became a friend of the young boy’s family around 2011, and during his testimony admitted the two had shared a bed on multiple occasions, saying the boy would sleep over before snowboarding trips or outings to a Kelowna water park.
Sometime around September 2011, the boy testified earlier this week, he masturbated T.B., after which T.B. ejaculated on his back. The boy said he did not refuse because he thought T.B. might physically harm him. He also recalled an instance of sexual abuse when the two were in the shower.
Skogstad said the boy, now in his teens, “diverts and when possible, blames others,” which makes his testimony not credible.
Skogstad alleged the boy has been proven to be untruthful in multiple incidents, fabricating events and that he essentially made up the allegations of sexual conduct after downloading $300 worth of apps to his iPod and charging T.B.’s account without permission.
“He deflects the blame, becomes the hero, strong because he’s a victim now,” Skogstad said.
Crown counsel agreed on the importance of the complainant’s evidence, though for much different reasons.
“When you are considering the evidence of (the boy), it’s important to remember that the Supreme Court has said on many occasions the evidence of children should not be evaluated on the same basis as the evidence of adults,” Swanson said.
Swanson said the testimony of the boy may be inconsistent around certain details, but not on the crucial matters. He pointed to the sexual details the boy recounted during the trial.
“That kind of detail lends an unmistakable badge of credibility to (the boy’s) evidence,” Swanson said.
Crown recounted that while T.B. was on the stand, he said he was looking to develop a friendship with the boy 10 years his junior.
“T.B. doesn’t say ‘now wait a minute I was trying to be a big brother,’ T.B. doesn’t say ‘I was trying to be a mentor.’ T.B. doesn’t say ‘I was trying to teach him how to be a man.’ T.B. says ‘well, I wanted a friend,’” Swanson said.
“That speaks to only one real issue, and that is that T.B. was grooming (the boy) with this manufactured friendship.”
Justice Alison Beames will render her decision on Monday.