After lunch, when it was time for Nikdima to drive her back to her car, he drove south on Lewvan Drive out of the city. Then, she said, he told her, "' We'll go up here and go for a bit of a walk.It's a nice day.'" The woman testified that Nikdima yanked off her pants and forcibly penetrated her vaginally, pushed her face down to perform oral sex, then penetrated her anally. The Crown reminded the court that "consent is not the absence of 'no.' It is the presence of 'yes.'" The highest court has ruled that a lack of resistance does not imply consent and that consent that is given under duress or based on fear does not qualify as true consent.The woman testified that she feared for her safety. Defence lawyer Barry Nychuk asked the woman about how many times she said no to the accused and why she didn't fight. In this case, the alleged victim said she was terrified.In the verdict, Justice Fred Kovach specified that he was only convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Nikdima committed sexual assault causing bodily harm at the point that Nikdima penetrated the woman anally without communicated consent and then disregarded her screams of pain.It is presented as a graphic survey to reflect on the experience of online dating as a racialized subject, using drawing as both a tool of contemplation and an embodied response. Even though I’m a journalist and a stranger she met online, I’m one of the only people she’s ever told her story to.
To Amy’s alarm, Paul drove her much farther out than she expected—hitting the Ingraham Trail, they sped by the city’s borders in his truck, passing Prosperous Lake and Madeline Lake, more than 27 kilometres out of the city.
The conviction on this serious criminal charge will likely lead to his deportation.
A sentencing hearing is scheduled for early December.
I think it is the correct one, based on all of the evidence," Zielke said.
Kovach said he considered the woman to be credible and reliable.