WESTLOCK – A Westlock-area teen now awaits sentencing after being convicted of sexual assault during which the Justice told him unequivocally that “no means no.”
In Westlock Court of Justice July 26, Justice Jeffrey Morrison delivered a guilty verdict to the teenager who was facing one charge of sexual assault — a trial was held during a special sitting of Westlock of Justice May 12, 2023, where the teenager and the victim both gave testimony. As per the Youth Criminal Justice Act, a publication bans bars any reporting that could identify him, or the victim.
Although Crown prosecutor Andrew Dirgo and defence lawyer Dan Nagase were prepared to offer a joint-sentence submission following the verdict, Justice Morrison, who’s been seized to the case, ordered a pre-sentence report to be delivered Nov. 1, 2023, for the teen stating, “ … we need to figure out as much as we can about what makes you tick.” Victim-impact statements from the girl and her mother had also slated to be tendered that day, but with the delay in sentencing, Justice Morrison said they can be appended in advance of the next court date in Westlock.
“We need to put together a sentence so that this doesn’t become your future life. So, I know everyone would like to see it done today, but we have to deal with young people with great sensitivity,” said Justice Morrison. “The court needs to consider all of the factors for sentencing in this particular case and with a youth, rehabilitation will be central to it, so any information a pre-sentence report will give the court will be quite helpful.”
Justice Morrison spent close to 10 minutes recalling the facts of the case before delivering his verdict, saying the assault took place at the boy’s residence during a school day — it progressed from the two cuddling while watching a movie, to a shower between the two.
Eventually, they ended up in the boy’s bedroom where Justice Morrison recalled that the girl testified that she had said, “no approximately a dozen times, but fellatio and penetration ensued.”
Following, she texted the boy and told him that “no means no” and he replied that he was sorry for what he had done, a statement Justice Morrison said, “shines a light into his heart and soul as to what occurred that day.” Justice Morrison went on to state that “consent can be turned on and off” and isn’t “carte blanche or a hall pass” and when it’s “clearly withdrawn without any ambiguity” the act must stop “despite all urges to the contrary.”
“It’s a matter of absolute clarity in the law that the phrase ‘no mean no’ means exactly what it seems to mean. It is very clear and very unambiguous,” he said. “When a party to a sexual act who has apparently consented decides that it will not proceed, that brings the matter to a halt. It’s that simple, even if it is biologically uncomfortable and even if it goes against what the person might have said or done earlier.
“No means no and it means so abruptly and definitely without any ambiguity.”
