Sex-crime trial hits snag over Instagram messages
Jonathan Dort, 41, of Geary, is accused of sexually assaulting a teenage girl in a vehicle on a backroad in the capital region two years ago
Warning: This article includes graphic descriptions of sexual assault.
A defence lawyer sought to halt his client’s sexual-assault trial Tuesday so he could explore what the accused and the complainant wrote to each other through social media before the alleged incident.
The trial of Jonathan Dort, 41, of Maxwell Road in Geary, got underway before provincial court Judge Natalie LeBlanc on Tuesday on charges of sexually assaulting a teenage girl and touching her for a sexual purpose.
The RCMP charges allege Jan. 7, 2021, events in the Fredericton Junction area.
The trial began with testimony from the complainant, whose identity is protected by a court-ordered publication ban.
She said she was 15 years old when she encountered Dort.
The girl, now 17, testified she and her older sister were heading from their home in the capital region to the Fredericton Junction residence of the sister’s boyfriend on Jan. 3 or 4, 2021.
Dort, who was an acquaintance of one of her siblings, gave them a drive to Fredericton Junction, she said.
On that drive, the complainant said, Dort asked to connect with her through social media and told her to input her information into his smartphone.
“I put a fake Snapchat [ID] in,” she said.
The girl said her sister’s boyfriend, who knew of Dort, told them they shouldn’t talk to Dort or trust him.
“But he didn’t tell us why,” she said.
Dort dropped them at the address in Fredericton Junction, she said, and they spent about three days there.
When it came time for her to go home, the witness said, it was arranged for Dort to drive her back - but alone, without her sister.
Dort arrived in his SUV, she said, and they chatted as he drove her home in the afternoon.
“We got on the topic of his kids,” the girl said, noting she learned Dort had a stepchild the same age as her.
As they travelled, she said, she noticed Dort was opting to take a lot of back roads to get there rather than the main thoroughfare.
“I didn’t know why,” she said.
As they neared her home, the girl said, she gave him directions.
“I told him to take a left,” she said, but Dort disregarded her and kept going straight down a different road. “He asked if I wanted to hang out with him, but I really didn’t want to … I didn’t know this guy.”
‘He got on top of me’
Dort stopped the SUV about 10-15 minutes from her home, she said, and he made advances toward her.
“He tried to kiss me, and I tried to push him away,” the teenager said, noting Dort also put his hand on her leg and left it there in an awkward silence.
Things kept progressing, she said, noting Dort exposed himself and tried to get her to perform oral sex on him.
“He unzipped his zipper,” the girl said.
At one point, Dort put his hat on his penis, she said.
“That was when he was trying to get me to go down on him,” the witness said, noting she refused.
“He got on top of me.”
She said she was wearing pyjama shorts that afternoon, and Dort pulled them aside to gain access to her vagina.
“Then he put his thing inside of me,” the girl said, adding she tried to push him off of her.
“It didn’t work, and he just kept going.”
The incident lasted about five minutes, she said.
There were residential driveways within view of where he’d parked the SUV, she said, and she hoped someone might come to help her.
“I tried rolling down the window so maybe someone would hear me,” she said.
“I was really scared … I thought when he did that to me he’d probably kill me after.”
The sexual assault only ended when Dort finished, she said.
“He ejaculated inside me,” the girl testified. “He gets off me and sits in his seat. He lights a cigarette and put some music on.”
After that, she said, Dort drove her home. When he dropped her off, the girl said, Dort told her to fix her makeup because it was smudged.
She said he didn’t seem to notice that she was uncomfortable with what had happened.
Instagram issue
When cross-examined by defence lawyer Alexander Carleton, the witness denied she spoke with Dort about her plans to go to a pit party, and denied she talked about drinking and smoking marijuana. She said she doesn’t drink or smoke pot.
The girl also noted she didn’t own a cellphone, but she had access to one and also access social-media apps on a computer.
She denied that she initiated any kiss or oral sex, and she denied the suggestion that she pulled her shorts aside to grant Dort access to her sexually.
She was never attracted to Dort, she said, and never thought she was in a relationship with him.
The witness said Dort had found her profile on Instagram before he’d driven her home and started messaging her when she was still at her sister’s boyfriend’s home that week. She acknowledged that they exchanged messages during that time, before he drove her home.
“So none of these messages were about this plan to have this [sexual] encounter?” Carleton asked her.
“Not really,” the girl answered.
She elaborated to say there was talk of sex during those messages, but she thought he was joking when he’d suggested it. Any mention of sex in those messages was only joking, the girl said.
When court reconvened after a brief recess, Carleton said the defence was seeking an adjournment.
He said the Instagram messages weren’t included in disclosure of the Crown file, and prosecutor Gwynne Hearn confirmed that, noting the Crown didn’t have those messages.
Carleton said he didn’t have them either, but he felt the precise content of those Instagram messages could be important to Dort’s defence.
Time would be necessary to retrieve those messages, he said, suggesting it might also require a court order for the service provider to produce them.
Furthermore, the defence lawyer said, the exploration of those messages and what they say could trigger the need for a hearing under Section 276 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
That section pertains to the inadmissibility of evidence about a complainant’s prior sexual history or statements that might suggest she is more likely to have consented to the impugned sexual activity - save for limited exceptions.
Hearn said a Section 276 would be in order if the defence wants to adduce the Instagram messages as evidence, and LeBlanc noted the complainant would be entitled for independent legal counsel for such a proceeding.
As such, the judge said, a lengthy adjournment of the trial was merited. She set the trial continuation down for Aug. 18.
“During this entire period, you’re going to remain under oath,” LeBlanc told the witness.
She said that means she can’t discuss her testimony or the trial with anyone, but she can speak to her family and others about anything else.
The judge also set a monitoring date of May 8 for the lawyers to update the court on efforts to get copies of the Instagram exchange and if it would be necessary to schedule a Section 276 hearing ahead of the resumption of the trial in late summer.
Carleton told court at the outset of the proceedings Tuesday that his client plans to testify.
Don MacPherson can be contacted at ftonindependent@gmail.com.
And it’s guys like this that need specialized prosecutions. Great reporting. And kudos to that defence lawyer for doing his job. Not that this guy deserves to be let off, he certainly needs to be convicted if the evidence presented is accurate and not misrepresented. For those wrongfully convicted these charges ruin their lives. But this crime is horrendous. She was 15. Doesn’t matter if she had sex with every boy in her gym class, this pig is a grown adult who ought to know better.
Anyone who has sex with a underage person is a pedophile and has raped that child as children can not give consent to have sex. Even if she did give consent she is to young and legally can not so again raping a child. I'm thinking he has a reputation for this as the friend said "stay away from him" . He was the adult and he new better . Let see what happens next . Great reporting Thanks you Don