The B.C. Court of Appeal has granted a man convicted of sexually assaulting his wife a new trial because messages between the pair about a consensual 91Ƶrape role-play91Ƶ scenario were wrongfully excluded as evidence.
The ruling released on Friday says the complainant and accused, who can91Ƶt be identified under a publication ban, were married but separated at the time of the alleged sexual assault in November 2019.
The ruling says the husband claimed during the trial that his wife 91Ƶagreed to participate in91Ƶ and 91Ƶinstigated91Ƶ a so-called 91Ƶrape role-play91Ƶ scenario, after they exchanged sexually explicit Facebook messages the night before the alleged assault.
The ruling says the woman sent her husband a video message including the sentence 91Ƶ91ƵReblog if you91Ƶre into Rape Play91Ƶ followed by an exchange that included the wife describing her fantasies.
The trial judge found the messages weren91Ƶt relevant because they didn91Ƶt contain a 91Ƶscript for the role-play.91Ƶ
91ƵA fantasy expressed is different from consent. Consent requires clear parameters and cannot be vague and broad. A fantasy can be entirely in the mind of the holder. Communicated consent cannot,91Ƶ the lower court ruled.
But the three-judge appeal panel disagreed, finding that the messages about 91Ƶa stranger rape and feigned sleep91Ƶ were relevant to whether the act was consensual, or whether the accused had an 91Ƶhonest but mistaken belief91Ƶ there was consent.
The trial judge was wrong to view the messages 91Ƶin isolation,91Ƶ the Appeal Court found, because they 91Ƶwere prior communications that related to the complainant91Ƶs interest in engaging in the very specific type of role-play.91Ƶ
The panel found the trial judge failed to consider the relevance of the messages in connection with a conversation on the day of the alleged assault, in which the husband said his wife described when they 91Ƶwould start role-playing.91Ƶ
The ruling says that left the accused to testify as if the conversation 91Ƶoccurred out of the blue, rather than as a followup to a discussion that the complainant initiated and participated in.91Ƶ
The woman denied having the conversation in question, testifying that 91Ƶthere was no talk of any sexual activity that day.91Ƶ
Defence lawyer Elliot Holzman, who represents the accused, said the case involves a somewhat 91Ƶrare91Ƶ set of facts where 91Ƶthe traditional notions of consent and honest but mistaken belief in consent have to be adapted to the facts of a rape role-play where one party is pretending to be sleeping or otherwise unconscious.91Ƶ
91ƵWhile the facts may seem somewhat salacious, I don91Ƶt think that the application of the law is at all controversial,91Ƶ he said.
Holzman said the messages at issue for the trial judge were very 91Ƶspecific91Ƶ about the conduct the couple had discussed, rather than generic or 91Ƶvague91Ƶ messages of a sexual nature.
He said courts have had to grapple with so-called 91Ƶrape role-play91Ƶ and the different 91Ƶmarkers of consent,91Ƶ which in this case were the excluded text messages discussing the act, in combination with a conversation the day of the alleged sexual assault.
91ƵSexual assault law is complicated,91Ƶ he said. 91ƵIt91Ƶs very important that we get it right and sometimes that does mean that a sexual assault conviction from trial has to be overturned.91Ƶ
He said a hearing is scheduled later this week in Kamloops provincial court.