Section 271 of the Criminal Code – Sexual Assault – Possessing child pornography – Luring a Child – Child exploitation – Invitation to sexual touching, Accessing child pornography, Creating child pornography.
T.J.K, a 25-year-old man interested in casual sex, looked towards online dating to meet people with similar interests. T.J.K. chose the dating application, Tinder, because it had the reputation of a place where people met for casual, no-strings-attached sex. T.J.K was open about his intentions and slept with multiple women through Tinder. Through tinder, T.J.K. met D.F.C., who posed as a 19-year-old, sexually experienced woman. The two chatted over the course of months and consensually exchanged explicit photographs. Ultimately, they arranged to meet in person where they engaged in consensual sex.
As it turned out, D.F.C was 15 years old. Notwithstanding that all interactions between D.F.C and T.J.K were factually consensual, a person under the age of 16 is unable to consent by law. Furthermore, explicit images of any person under the age of 18 years of age constitutes child pornography. T.J.K was ultimately charged with 12 different criminal offences including sexual assault, luring a child, sending sexually explicit images to a child, creating child pornography, possessing child pornography, accessing child pornography, and invitation to sexual touching.
T.JK. had never been in trouble in his life, and he risked a significant mandatory period of incarceration, as well as being a registered sex offender. T.JK. retained criminal defence lawyer Sean Fagan. The matter was scheduled for a preliminary inquiry, where Sean Fagan was successful at having the Crown abandon a number of the charges that T.J.K. faced. After the preliminary inquiry, the matter was scheduled for trial – a trial before a jury of T.J. K’s peers. Prior to trial, Sean Fagan through communicating with the Crown prosecutors was successful at having the charges further pared down to just 3 criminal offences.
At trial, D.F.C testified to her interactions with T.J.K. and claimed that all interactions with T.J.K were non-consensual. Sean Fagan was successful at discrediting T.J.K through a challenging cross-examination of the hostile, young witness.
Bottom line: the jury came back with a verdict of not guilty on all charges.