Loading...
The Supreme Court of Canada unanimously upheld the conviction of a man held guilty of sexual assault for poking holes in his girlfriend’s condoms. The court held it was an act meant to trick the woman into becoming pregnant and amounts to sex by misrepresentation.
The condom saboteur, Craig Jaret Hutchinson was sentenced to 18 months in jail in December 2011 after it was found that he had used a pin to put holes in the condoms of her girlfriend in 2006 in a bid to make her pregnant, and prevent a break up.
Last year, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Canada had rejected Hutchinson’s appeal that the sentence was excessive and that the woman had voluntarily consented to sex. However, that court found Hutchinson not guilty of aggravated sexual assault.
Later the Appeal Court of the province overturned the decision and ordered a new trial, where Hutchinson was convicted for sexual assault.
The woman ultimately became pregnant, but she had an abortion, which later led to uterine infection that had to be treated with antibiotics.
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Hutchinson had effectively deprived the woman of her ability to consent to sex.
The court observed, “The accused’s condom sabotage constituted fraud … the result that no consent was obtained … We would therefore affirm the conviction and dismiss the appeal.”
Canada’s Supreme Court further observed, “We conclude that where a complainant has chosen not to become pregnant, deceptions that deprive her of the benefit of that choice by making her pregnant, or exposing her to an increased risk of becoming pregnant by removing effective birth control, may constitute a sufficiently serious deprivation for the purposes of fraud vitiating consent.”
The courts decided on the issue upon the presumption that the insistence upon use of condoms by the woman made it clear that protected sex was an essential feature and inseparable component of her consent to sex, and that consent had been obtained by fraud.
