Canada’s military appeals court has ordered a new trial in the case of a former master corporal who was found guilty of sexually assaulting his then-partner and fellow soldier.
In June 2022, a court martial found Claude Houde, an aircraft structural technician, guilty of two charges of sexual assault. He was sentenced to two years less a day in prison and was discharged from the Canadian Armed Forces in 2023.
The alleged assaults took place while the couple lived together in Canadian Forces Base Bagotville between 2013 and 2018. Houde was acquitted of a third charge, sexual assault causing bodily harm. Houde allegedly engaged in acts of unsolicited sexual contact with his partner between 2015 and 2017, in the bathroom and in the bedroom of their shared home.
Houde’s appeal centred on the claim that the judge had failed to properly apply the principles used to ensure the burden is on the Crown to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Houde argued the judge’s instructions to the panel focused heavily on the prosecution’s evidence and had a potential influence on the panel.
During the trial, the judge made several comments instructing the panel to take the credibility of the witness’s testimony into account.
“If you believe the witness’s testimony, it should not be very difficult for you to answer the questions I will list later on concerning the essential elements of the offences,” the judge’s transcript reads. The judge also reminded members of the court that the complainant had “sworn to tell the truth,” something which Houde argued strengthened the complainant’s credibility in the eyes of the panel.
The judge also reminded panelists that during a complainant’s testimony, they will rarely describe events in the same way they did in a police report, months or years earlier. The appellant argued that this minimized any inconsistencies found in the complainant’s case.
Houde called into question the justice’s instructions regarding two pieces of photographic evidence where he told the panel to consider whether they accepted the evidence prior to analyzing it, something which Houde argued influenced his ability to appear innocent before proven guilty.
Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada Justice Guy Cournoyer called the comments made by the previous justice “highly problematic” and criticized the characterization of the photographs as “inappropriate.”
“It is recognized that a judge may comment on the evidence, although this might not be advisable,” Cournoyer said. “That said, when a judge comments on the evidence, he or she must do so fairly.”
In his rationale, Cournoyer cited the Ontario Court of Appeals case R v Miller, which, according to the ruling, established that “evidence which is neither rejected nor accepted should survive to the final stage of the jury’s determination on the crucial application of reasonable doubt.”
In a decision delivered in Ottawa on Oct. 14, Cournoyer ordered a new trial with respect to the charges Houde was convicted of, citing the judge’s misguided advice to panelists on the prosecution’s evidence.
A new trial date has not been set.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
