A BC Supreme Court judge acquitted a man of sexual assault Feb. 21 in Prince George, after finding flaws in testimony by the complainants.
Shannon Moorehouse, who was charged in April 2024 and tried Jan. 21-24, denied ever inappropriately touching the complainants, whose identities are covered by a publication ban.
“While I did not find the evidence of the accused to be 100 per cent satisfactory, because he couched many of his answers by saying the word ‘possibly’ when giving his answers, the accused was not shaken on cross-examination,” said Justice Ronald Tindale in his oral verdict. “Based on a consideration of all the evidence, I find myself unable to determine whose evidence to believe in relation to the evidence of the accused (and complainants).”
As such, Tindale said, the Crown failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Tindale said one of the complainants testified at trial that the sexual assaults began in 2015 at a sleepover and “ended when COVID occurred.”
Both complainants described incidents of sexual touching when they stayed overnight, in the living room or on a chair. Tindale said there were differences. One described being touched during a camping trip, the other did not. One described being massaged, the other did not.
Moorehouse agreed he may have given one of them a massage, because she participated in a sport and often complained of sore muscles.
The judge said one of the difficulties he had was that the two complainants “clearly discussed these allegations between them.”
One of them had decided to wear a one-piece outfit to deter the accused, a strategy he said came as a result of their discussion. Tindale said the complainants had “more than a cursory discussion” about what happened in the residence of the accused.
“This raises the issue of unconscious collusion,” Tindale said.
Tindale said there were significant differences in the nature of the touch described by the two complainants, but “the Crown has not proven that the complainants’ evidence was not tainted by the discussions.”
Tindale noted there was no medical evidence, testimony from independent witnesses or other corroborative evidence in the case. He conceded there is no way to predict how a victim of sexual violence, particularly a child, will react. But he said the complainants kept visiting the residence of the accused when there was nothing compelling them to be there. For instance, they were neither relatives nor babysitters for the accused and his family.
One of the complainants testified that she continued visiting so that no one else would be hurt, even though she said she knew the accused was also touching another girl.
“Taking a common sense approach to the evidence of the complainants, or explanations as to why they continued to go over to the accused’s residence over a period of six years, does not make any sense,” Tindale said.
