‘He took what he wanted’: judge finds southeastern Manitoba man guilty of sexual assault

A southeastern Manitoba man was found guilty of sexual assault and was called “reckless or wilfully blind” when ignoring consent in a Steinbach provincial courtroom last week.

Provinical court Judge Kael McKenzie read his verdict for the now 19-year-old man after both the victim and the accused testified during the trial held last year.

The Carillon can’t identify the victim or accused due to a publication ban.

“The accused had a public, positive obligation to ensure she was consenting, and at best was either reckless or wilfully blind whether consent was communicated, even on his evidence,” McKenzie told the court.

“When she said no, he persisted, and he took what he wanted.”

Court heard the incident happened on June 14, 2023 when both the accused and the victim were 16-years-old. Both people attended school together since 2017 and spent time together on three occasions. On the second instance, the accused messaged the victim to come over to his house at roughly 9:30 a.m. They spent time on their phones and watched a movie together. After the movie, the accused asked the victim for oral sex, which she refused and was angry with him.

Court heard the accused tried to convince the victim and she continued to say no and was angry again. The victim testified that the accused tickled her and pull her shorts off, McKenzie said. After she told him to stop, the accused asked her for anal sex so he wouldn’t lose his virginity. Despite saying he would still lose his virginity, repeatedly saying no and trying to kick him, the accused penetrated her vagina with his penis. After he was finished, he told the victim to go back to school.

The victim told her friends at school what happened, and they encouraged her to get tested for sexual assault, court heard. But when she arrived at the clinic for the test, she left without one because she didn’t want her parents to find out. She later went to see a nurse for birth control medication and told the nurse what happened but tried to convince her it wasn’t rape.

The victim later texted the accused and asked to have sex with him again, but he said no, citing his religion, court heard.

“She explained that in some way, she felt that if she consented, it would somehow cancel out what the accused had done to her,” McKenzie said.

During cross examination, the victim said she confronted the accused, and he admitted they had sex. But the accused later denied any sex happened and said he would pray for her that her memory would get better, court heard. As she discussed the incident with friends, she concluded she was raped and went to the police.

Both the accused and victim attended the same church and saw each other there after the incident.

The accused testified he believed the victim was crazy, a liar and that she was stalking him. He said the victim was flirting on her phone, but did say she said no to oral sex and became angry with him. Court heard the accused say he pulled her by the shorts and they both took it off. He testified she told him she couldn’t get pregnant because she was “on the pill” and said she didn’t have a condom.

McKenzie said the accused’ evidence supported a conviction because the court found he didn’t take necessary steps to ensure consent was given. He raised issues over the accused’s testimony, calling the 25-minute timeline he gave unrealistic. Court heard the accused first testify his intent for the inviting the victim to his house wasn’t for sex, but later said it was.

Since both people didn’t know each other well and had just begun their intimate relationship, there should’ve been more need for clear, affirmative consent, McKenzie said.

“His evidence was clearly trying to paint the complainant in the most damaging way possible, attempting to demonstrate why she would make these allegations,” he said.

A sentence is expected in April.