Man found not guilty of sexually touching daughter

A Manitoba judge acquitted a father accused of sexually touching his daughter over a 10-month period, saying inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony left her with reasonable doubt.

“While I do not believe the accused’s denials and generally prefer the complainant’s evidence where their accounts conflict, I am unable to conclude with the requisite certainty what, if anything, happened,” provincial court Judge Shauna Hewitt-Michta said in a written decision delivered in Virden last month.

The accused, who can’t be identified due to a publication ban, was charged with sexual interference arising from allegations he touched his now 11-year-old daughter inappropriately on multiple occasions between September 2023 and July 2024.

During that time frame, the girl was alternating between living at her mother and father’s homes as a result of a shared custody arrangement since her parents separated when she was three years old.

The girl reported the allegations to her mother in July 2024, which prompted Winnipeg’s Toba Centre for Children and Youth to investigate the incident further. She disclosed to a forensic interviewer that her father verbally and sexually abused her.

“She said the accused had been yelling and swearing at her; blaming her and calling her names. She reported him touching her buttocks, chest, and thighs in a sexual manner and calling her ‘sexy,’” Hewitt-Michta said.

Her recorded video statement was used as evidence in a trial.

Hewitt-Michta said the girl presented as an articulate, sincere and credible witness who testified in a straightforward manner. She noted the victim gave a “compelling description” of her father’s facial expression during the alleged assaults.

However, inconsistencies between the girl’s video statement, what she said to the Crown during trial preparation and her testimony in court caused concerns regarding the reliability of aspects of her evidence, the judge said.

“In her statement, the complainant said her dad called her “sexy” in connection with rubbing her chest while in court she testified he used the word ‘sexy’ when he slapped her buttocks,” Hewitt-Michta said.

“During the recorded interview, she said the first incident involved the accused touching her thighs while in court she said it was the accused slapping her buttocks.”

Other inconsistencies involved a demonstration of how her father allegedly touched her chest and when the touching occurred. Before the trial, the girl told a Crown prosecutor that the sexual touching started when she was in Grade 2, but during the trial she said it started in Grade 3, Hewitt-Michta said.

“This inconsistency is potentially significant because the complainant was not residing with the accused for a substantial portion of her Grade 2 year.”

There were also inconsistences with the frequency and number of times she was touched.

While speaking with the forensic interviewer, she claimed her father had touched her thighs more than once, rubbed her chest at least three times, and would slap and squeeze her buttocks.

She said these incidents happened until she stopped going to her father’s home.

In court, she estimated the accused moved his hand up her thigh toward her vagina about 100 times, rubbed her chest about 20 times and slapped her buttocks more than 50 times.

“Trial judges must be mindful that children often have difficulty with event chronology, frequency estimates, dates, time measurements and distinguishing among repeated events,” Hewitt-Michta said.

“Weaknesses in these aspects of a child’s evidence do not necessarily undermine the reliability of the child’s essential account.”

During the accused’s testimony, he “adamantly” denied ever touching the victim in a sexual manner, Hewitt-Michta said.

He described struggling with an illness compounded by chronic pain and often felt impatient with the girl where he would yell, swear, call her names and blame her for difficulties in the home when she was trying to be helpful.

“His evidence hinted at possible motives for the complainant to fabricate the allegations, including disagreements regarding social media use or iPad screen time, as well as resentment arising from the verbal abuse,” she said.

Hewitt-Michta said the accused’s version of events was shaped by his desire to ensure none of his evidence was consistent with the allegations, including an “improbable denial” that he rarely had physical contact with his child and didn’t even sit beside her on the couch.

He testified he was largely incapacitated by illness and spent most of his time in bed or on a chair, which conflicted with his statement during cross-examination, when he spoke about participating in activities outside of the home with his daughter.

While he made admissions against his self-interest and described his daughter as the centre of his world, his credibility and reliability were undermined through minimizations and inconsistencies, Hewitt-Michta said.

Attached to the judge’s written decision was a child-friendly explanation of her reasons addressed to the victim.

“This decision does not mean I think you were lying,” she wrote.

“Even though I believe you did your best to tell me what happened and even though I had trouble believing some things your dad said, I cannot find him guilty unless I am very sure.”

» tadamski@brandonsun.com