The Role of Motive in Sexual Assault Trials

Abstract

In sexual assault cases, the motive of the complainant has traditionally been heavily scrutinized, based on sexist beliefs that women are likely to bring false complaints of rape based on motives of revenge, fantasy, and shame. Recent sexual assault cases have demonstrated the persistence of these beliefs even after the formal rules that validated them were abolished. At the same time, attempts by the Crown to show an absence of motive to lie have faced a high bar. Consistent with the general rule that motive is not required to prove mens rea, the accused’s motives have mostly escaped scrutiny. However, the recent high-profile case of R. v Barton shows the dangers of allowing the accused to rely on his alleged lack of motive to sexually assault the complainant. This article examines how both evidence of motive and absence of motive have been applied to the complainant and the accused in sexual assault cases. Caution is necessary when considering motive in relation to the complainant because of the direct connection with rape myths. Reliance on an accused’s absence of motive should also be discouraged as the reasons men rape cannot be reduced to a personal vendetta towards any one victim.