EP#137 | The Capacity to Consent

The complexities of capacity and consent, particularly in cases involving intoxication and memory loss, necessitate careful communication and evaluation of evidence to determine the validity of consent in legal contexts 

Questions to inspire discussion

Key Insights

#Justice

 XMentions: @NotOnRecord @NotOnRecordpodcast

Clips 

• 00:00 ⚖️ This episode explores the complexities of capacity and consent, emphasizing the importance of communication and differing accounts in determining honest but mistaken belief in consent, especially in intoxication cases.
  • The episode reviews the principles of capacity and consent, particularly in relation to intoxication and honest mistaken belief, referencing a significant court decision.
  • A trial judge must present all viable defenses to the jury, even if not raised by the defense, as long as there is an air of reality to those defenses.
  • Honest but mistaken belief in consent requires reasonable communication to ascertain consent, and conflicting accounts of events can complicate the determination of whether consent was present.
  • Differing accounts between the complainant and the accused can be used to construct a plausible defense of honest but mistaken belief in consent, allowing for credibility assessment despite disagreements on specific facts.
  • Consent is subjective, determined by the complainant's communication, while the accused's belief in consent must be based on a factual understanding of the situation, considering both parties' actions and intentions.
  • A case highlighted the complexities of consent when mixed signals and a history of intimate interactions led one party to mistakenly believe they had consent.
• 07:24 ⚖️ The complexity of consent in legal cases is influenced by factors like intoxication and memory loss, with recent rulings clarifying the evaluation of capacity to consent and the implications of a victim's history.
  • The complexity of consent in legal cases is heightened by factors like intoxication, which can lead to misunderstandings of behaviors and comments as consent.
  • The Swain Gordon decision highlights a crown appeal regarding the trial judge's error in analyzing capacity to consent and subjective consent.
  • A complainant's lack of memory due to blackout does not automatically acquit the accused, as consent can still be evaluated through circumstantial evidence and testimonies.
  • The crown's reliance on a victim's attitude can complicate cases by allowing the defense to introduce evidence of the victim's sexual history, as demonstrated in a Kingston case where the crown reconsidered leading such evidence.
  • The court of appeal decision in GF establishes the leading definition and test for capacity to consent in sexual assault cases.
  • The capacity law, particularly section 20 from 2021, is crucial and requires careful reading, starting with the actus reus.
• 13:16 ⚖️ In Canada, proving sexual assault requires demonstrating the complainant's capacity to consent, which goes beyond basic functional abilities and includes understanding the act and context, as evidenced by circumstantial factors like CCTV and witness accounts.
  • Sexual assault in Canada requires proof of sexual touching without consent, where the complainant must have the capacity to understand the nature of the act, its sexual context, the identity of their partner, and their right to refuse participation.
  • The ability to walk, talk, and use a phone does not definitively establish a person's capacity to consent, as demonstrated by a case where these actions were insufficient to prove capacity.
  • The judge emphasized that circumstantial evidence raised reasonable doubt about the complainant's capacity to consent, highlighting the importance of understanding functional abilities beyond just textual clarity.
  • The ability to perform basic functions and demonstrate cognitive awareness can serve as circumstantial evidence to challenge claims of lack of capacity.
  • Evidence such as CCTV footage and witness accounts can significantly impact the assessment of consent in cases involving intoxication.
• 19:06 👟 CCTV and digital evidence are vital in consent cases, with courts stressing the importance of evaluating overall evidence amid memory loss challenges.
  • The speaker recalls wearing nice running shoes, possibly from the brand Vasia.
  • CCTV footage and digital evidence play a crucial role in consent-related cases, often accessible without needing a subpoena.
  • The court of appeal emphasized the need to assess the overall evidence in cases of memory loss or blackouts, highlighting the challenges in establishing reliability and credibility when consent is questioned.
• 22:20 ⚖️ Misrepresentations in consent cases, especially involving intoxication, highlight the need for careful scrutiny of consent capacity, as affirmed by a New Brunswick Court of Appeal ruling.
  • Misrepresentations in consent cases, particularly regarding alcohol consumption, can lead to wrongful convictions despite the legal standard allowing for consent even when intoxicated.
  • Capacity to consent must be carefully scrutinized, especially in cases involving coercion or manipulation.
  • The New Brunswick Court of Appeal upheld a conviction appeal, affirming that the trial judge properly assessed the capacity to consent based on established factors.
  • The speakers are experiencing technical difficulties with reading smaller print and adjusting their scripts.
• 27:04 🤔 Consent requires clear understanding and ongoing evaluation, as illustrated by a case where unconsciousness invalidated initial consent, raising concerns about legal definitions and natural human interactions.
  • Subjective consent necessitates that the complainant understands their choice to engage in sexual activity and can evaluate each act, meaning an unconscious individual cannot provide valid consent.
  • A woman initially claimed she consented to a sexual act involving choking but later argued it was non-consensual due to her unconscious state, highlighting the legal complexities of consent in such situations.
  • The term "operating mind" is criticized for implying a higher cognitive threshold that may not apply to everyone.
  • Consent in sexual activities requires ongoing evaluation and monitoring, especially when significant changes occur, rather than strict verbal checks for every action.
  • Human sexual interactions often flow naturally without conscious consent checks, but there is a push for legal changes to formalize consent in ways that may not align with typical human behavior.
• 32:00 🚨 A complainant's intoxication and expressed disinterest in sex, supported by circumstantial evidence, raise questions about her capacity to consent, with the jury tasked to assess reasonable doubt.
  • The complainant was too intoxicated to consent and had expressed disinterest in sex, as confirmed by her roommate's testimony.
  • The case relies on circumstantial evidence to infer the complainant's lack of capacity to consent due to memory loss regarding the sexual activity.
  • Evidence is relevant when it influences the likelihood of a claim being true, similar to adding pieces to a bag.
  • Circumstantial evidence must be compelling enough to eliminate reasonable alternative explanations to support a conviction, with the jury determining if such alternatives raise reasonable doubt.
• 35:54 ⚖️ Circumstantial evidence in sexual assault cases, especially with memory loss, can mislead and complicate consent determinations, highlighting the need for timely evidence and understanding legal complexities.
  • Circumstantial evidence alone cannot prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in cases where the complainant has no recollection of the sexual activity, as alternative reasonable explanations must be considered.
  • Circumstantial evidence can be misleading in consent cases, especially when a complainant has no memory of events, as it often focuses on irrelevant details rather than the actual incident.
  • The relevance of evidence in sexual assault cases can diminish over time, and a lack of memory does not guarantee acquittal, as circumstantial evidence can still lead to conviction if it meets the high threshold of Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
  • Recent legal decisions highlight the importance of understanding permissible actions and the limitations of guarantees in legal cases.
  • Understanding the complexities of legal cases on capacity reveals ongoing challenges and inconsistencies in court rulings.
  • Understanding the importance of timely evidence gathering is crucial for defense, especially in light of recent issues regarding the revocation of Canadian passports for citizens facing certain charges.

-------------------------------------

WatchUrl: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZgIsQ0EcC4

Publication Date: 2024-10-13T18:08:32Z

-------------------------------------