Father convicted of sexually abusing daughter
Justice Thomas Christie said victim’s testimony that Burton man forced her to stroke his penis to climax on two occasions in 2017 proved charges beyond reasonable doubt
Warning: This report contains graphic details of sexual crimes against a minor.
A judge ruled Wednesday that a Burton man forced his teenage daughter to touch his penis on two occasions between 2017 and 2018, and that the offender described her as “sexy.”
The 63-year-old Burton man, formerly of Cambridge-Narrows, stood trial in September on charges of sexual assault and sexual interference, alleging he sexually abused his underage daughter between Jan. 1, 2017, and Dec. 31, 2018.
There’s a court-ordered publication ban on the complainant’s identity, so given the relationship to the accused, the Fredericton Independent isn’t naming him either.
Court of King’s Bench Justice Thomas Christie rendered his decision on the trial Wednesday at the Burton Courthouse, and he found the accused guilty as charged.
The judge noted the evidence at trial came from only two Crown witnesses, the victim and the investigating officer, RCMP Sgt. Dwayne Cross, but the most important testimony was that of the complainant.
He said the young woman reported that her father had sexually abused her on four occasions: once in the family car on the way to a church service, twice at the family home and once in a camper where the family was living temporarily when another home was under construction.
Recounting four assaults
The victim told court the incident in the car was the first, but she couldn’t recall specifically when it occurred.
Her testimony was that her father was angry that day, and he was smashing his fists on the steering wheel, telling his daughter he wished he could have been punching her.
He calmed down and apologized, the girl said, and that’s when he slid his hand up her dress and touched her vagina.
“In response, [the girl] hit him and climbed into the back seat,” Christie said in recounting her evidence.
The second reported incident occurred in her bedroom, the judge said, and the offender entered the room while the victim was watching TV on her bed.
He climbed onto the bed and removed his pants, the woman testified.
“He pulled her hand and placed it on his penis,” Christie said, noting the victim reported her father then forced her to stroke his penis until he ejaculated.
“[She said] there was stuff coming out of his penis.”
She cried during the entire incident, the witness said, and her father told her not to tell anyone.
Nevertheless, the victim said, she ran to another room where her mother was sleeping to tell her what had happened, but her mother dismissed what she was saying.
She testified that happened about a month before the third incident, which occurred in the family’s living room in April 2017. She said her mother was out at the time, visiting her older sister in the hospital as she’d just given birth.
The victim testified she was playing a video game when her father entered the living room and said, “It was not his fault he had a sexy daughter,” Christie recalled.
That’s when the defendant pulled his underwear down and again forced her to stroke his penis with her hand.
“[She] could not get away,” Christie said, noting the witness reported her father had an iron grip on her hand that hurt.
Afterward, the defendant drove the girl to the hospital to visit her sister as well, the judge said, and on the way, he told his daughter not to tell anyone what had happened.
The judge said the fourth described incident was reported to have occurred in a camper where the family was living while a new home was under construction. Again, father and daughter were alone, the witness said, and again, the defendant approached her in his underwear.
“She testified that he pulled down his underwear and grabbed her hand and forced her to touch his penis,” Christie noted.
However, the victim said on this occasion, her father forced her head down and pushed his penis into her mouth, and he held her head there until he ejaculated into her mouth.
It was during the next day when she was at school that the girl reported that incident to her guidance counsellor, court heard.
It was after that that she was removed from the family home and placed with a family member, the judge said.
However, there was some confusion about the girl’s history with child-protection workers with the Department of Social Development, as it appears there were multiple interventions and different placements.
At one point, court heard, the girl was placed in the care of her older sister, but she later returned to live with her father after her sister encouraged her to do so.
When that happened in the overall sequence of events wasn’t clear, the judge said.
Uncertainty and confirmation in timeline
The first reported incident in the car posed some challenges for the Crown’s case because there was no evidence as to when it occurred, Christie said.
He noted the prosecution conceded the court couldn’t consider that part of the evidence since the Crown couldn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it fell within the timeframe mentioned in the charges.
The judge said the same argument held true for the camper incident. While the witness testified it was the last in the series of events, he said, the evidence didn’t establish conclusively, even in general terms, when it was purported to have happened.
As such, he said, he couldn’t consider that part of the victim’s testimony either.
However, Christie said, the second and third incidents alleged to have occurred at the family home were different matters.
He noted the victim linked those events in time to the birth of her niece, and that clearly did fall within the chronological range set out in the charges.
The defence had challenged that assertion during the trial, as the victim didn’t connect those events in time to the niece’s birth, and she only relayed that information to the prosecution shortly before the trial.
The witness told the court she hadn’t mentioned that time element in her initial interviews with social workers and police because she only made the connection later.
The victim noted she had memory problems and had been hospitalized for mental-health issues, but as the trial approached, she remembered how the third incident had happened the same day her father took her to see her sister in the hospital.
“I have no reason to doubt that explanation,” Christie said.
The victim also noted the second incident occurred about a month before the third one, he said.
“Even if it was two or three months earlier, there is sufficient connection,” the judge said.
Defendant didn’t testify
Christie noted the defence called no witnesses, not even the accused - and he didn’t have to do so. It’s incumbent on the Crown to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge said, and the defendant has to prove nothing.
When Cross was on the witness stand, though, the defence got to him say under cross-examination that the suspect denied the allegations against him to police.
The judge said the prosecution objected to that evidence being put before the court, as the defendant isn’t allowed to introduce exculpatory statements he might have made through another witness.
But Christie said he allowed it but didn’t hear any of the details of the defendant’s denial. The police officer’s statement offered no more information than the defendant’s own pleas of not guilty at the outset of the trial. As such, he said, it wasn’t something for the court to consider as an exculpatory statement.
“The substantive evidence was from [the complainant,]” the judge said.
The defence tried to challenge her credibility by suggesting she had a motive to lie because she was upset that her father hadn’t bought her things when she asked.
“I find there is no evidence to support that assertion,” Christie said.
The judge said the young woman offered detailed descriptions of what happened, including what she was wearing at the various times, where and how she was seated, what her father said and did, and more.
The defence said her inability to specify times for many of the events she alleged and gaps in her memory about such elements amounted to inconsistencies that called her credibility and reliability as a witness into question.
Defence lawyer Emily Cochrane had also argued the witness’s 11th-hour reporting of the third incident happening around the same time as her niece’s birth was circumspect and rendered her credibility questionable.
But Christie said he accepted the young woman’s explanation for that later reporting of events that cemented the timeline of events.
He said he found her to be credible and reliable.
“I can find no reason to doubt her evidence,” the judge said.
As such, he found the defendant guilty as charged on both counts.
The accused tried to protest and apparently offer information to the court in light of the judge’s decision.
“Can I speak for a minute, your honour?” he asked.
Cochrane firmly told him to stop and silenced him. “No, sit. Sit,” she told him.
Subject to conditions pending sentence
In light of the guilty finding, prosecutor Rebecca Butler asked the court to remand the offender pending his sentencing hearing.
Cochrane objected, asking the court to allow her client to remain free until sentencing, but subject to strict conditions.
“I know the presumption of innocence is gone,” she said, but she noted the accused had attended court as required throughout the process - even before the charge was laid, which came later than originally expected.
The defence lawyer noted that the one time her client didn’t attend a pre-trial conference in the case, it was because she’d told him to go to the wrong building, so that wasn’t his mistake but rather hers.
“There’s no flight risk concerns,” Cochrane said.
Furthermore, she argued, he runs a business and lives alone, so he needs time to tend to his employees, arrange for layoffs and to get his house in order, literally.
The offender also has ongoing health issues, she said, and as the sentence will undoubtedly involve incarceration, it’s reasonable to give him time to prepare for that.
Christie agreed. He issued a release order that requires the offender to remain under house arrest save for limited exceptions, to have no contact with the victim and other family members, to report by phone to the RCMP every Monday, to surrender his passport to police, to have no unsupervised contact with minors, to refrain from attending events geared toward kids, to abstain from alcohol and non-prescribed drugs, to stay out of establishments where alcohol is sold, and to attend court as required.
As per Crown and defence requests, Christie ordered the preparation of a pre-sentence report and victim-impact statements for consideration at the sentencing hearing, which he scheduled for Jan. 31.
Don MacPherson can be contacted at ftonindependent@gmail.com.
He is a pedophile that raped his own daughter :( -- He never should have been let out -- You can not fix a pedophile -- Who in there right mind will ever do business with this POS -- Holy hell