A Nova Scotia man’s history of regular violence and threats against his common-law spouse has material bearing on charges that he trafficked her for sex, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled, overturning his acquittal and ordering a new trial.
The accused, identified only as T.J.F. in a recent ruling from the country’s top court, was in a relationship with J.D. from 2004 until 2012. He was acquitted at trial, a decision affirmed by the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.
“The trial judge committed an error of law when he held that the evidence of regular violence and threats of violence by the accused against the complainant was past discreditable conduct evidence,” Justice Michelle O’Bonsawin wrote for the majority.
“Even though the trial judge admitted the evidence, this mischaracterization meant he did not assess it properly. That evidence could have been relevant to the essential elements of the offence. It could have formed the basis of a finding that the accused controlled, directed, or influenced the movements of the complainant during the time period specified in the indictment, and a contributing cause of the complainant’s engagement in sexual services. The trial judge’s incorrect assessment of this critical evidence seriously undermined his credibility assessment of the complainant, which he used as the rationale for acquittal.”
The trial judge’s mischaracterization “hindered his overall assessment of the evidence and considerably diminished the evidentiary foundation relevant to the essential elements of the trafficking in persons offence,” said O’Bonsawin.
“I am satisfied, to a reasonable degree of certainty, that the verdicts of acquittal would not necessarily have been the same had this error not occurred.”
Seven judges on the country’s top court sided with that outcome, while two others offered a dissenting opinion.
Justices Suzanne Côté and Malcolm Rowe said that the trial judge’s mischaracterization “did not have a material bearing on the acquittals,” and they would have dismissed the appeal.
“One can imagine a scenario where a person that provides sexual services is also in a violent and abusive relationship,” said the dissenting judges. “Both of these can exist separate and independent of the other. While the abusive partner may in fact control, influence, and direct the other partner in their relationship, they may have nothing to do with the fact that this partner provides sexual services.”
The pair’s “relationship was plagued by violence and financial difficulties,” said the decision.
“According to the complainant, the accused suggested they have sex on a webcam for money, and she was unwilling to do this but agreed to avoid the accused’s violence. She claimed that the accused persuaded her to dance for men and to offer sexual services for money, and that she participated because of the accused’s violence. She also claimed that the accused was involved in posting ads offering sexual services and controlled all proceeds, and that this continued until she left the accused in 2012.”
At trial, J.D.’s brother, mother and daughter, and two of her friends testified about T.J.F.’s violence towards J.D.
“While (the trial judge) accepted that the complainant found herself in a violent relationship with the accused, he found her testimony lacking in credibility, and had a reasonable doubt about the accused’s ties to any prostitution enterprise,” said the Supreme Court decision, dated Nov. 15.
The court heard that their common law relationship was “marked by violence, evictions, and financial difficulties,” said the decision, which noted they cared for two children while they were together.
“The couple relocated from Halifax, Nova Scotia, to Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta, then to Edmonton, Alberta, and eventually returned to Halifax. While in Fort Saskatchewan, they started engaging in sexual services for compensation, initially by having sex on a webcam, which then evolved to the provision of sexual services by the complainant.”
While in Fort Saskatchewan, she worked in a bar; he was unemployed.
“Their financial difficulties were ongoing, and the accused’s violence escalated to a level that was ‘twice as bad as in Halifax.’ Soon after the complainant secured a better-paying job at a strip bar in Edmonton, the accused suggested they have sex on a webcam for money.”
She testified that T.J.F “was deeply involved in the sexual services. He posted ads offering sexual services and accompanied her to clients’ locations to either watch or listen to the sexual acts requested by clients. All proceeds went to the accused, while the complainant ‘only received enough to pay a few bills.’”
She left him in 2012.
“Fearing she could lose her children, the complainant never disclosed to anyone what was happening while it was occurring,” said the decision.
According to Nova Scotia’s Public Prosecution Service, new trial dates for T.J.F. have not yet been set.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.