Crown recommends acquittal on 1 charge against former educational assistant in Whitehorse

Warning: This story contains details some people may find distressing.

Citing a lack of evidence, the Crown prosecutor in the trial of a former educational assistant at Whitehorse's Hidden Valley Elementary School has asked the judge that William Auclair-Bellemare be acquitted on a charge of sexual assault. 

It seemed to mark an unusual end to the three-day trial on Wednesday, which heard from four witnesses over allegations of sexual abuse against a student. Crown prosecutor Caroline Lirette said she was unable to find enough evidence that there had been any physical contact between the alleged victim and Auclair-Bellemare, adding that she had a legal duty to invite acquittal. 

Auclair-Bellemare stood trial this week on two other charges: invitation to sexual touching and forcible confinement against a student. The alleged incident took place between 2015 and 2017.

The alleged victim, a student, in this week's trial described being taken by Auclair-Bellemare from a classroom to a change room that was not being used. 

Auclair-Bellemare allegedly drew a sketch of the child before throwing it away. 

The identity of the child, who appeared in court via video conference on Monday, is covered by a publication ban.

Crown prosecutor Caroline Lirette argued that there was an invitation to sexual touching when Auclair-Bellemare allegedly asked the child to remove their pants and underwear. She said the act constitutes indirect touching as the child had to touch themself or be touched in order to get undressed. She said it meant exposing the child's private parts. 

Lirette asked the judge to recognize the sexual intention that comes with such a request.

She also argued that the alleged victim testified that they felt they had to stay in the changing room — which could constitute forcible confinement. Lirette argued Auclair-Bellemare's intention of confinement was clear when he took the child outside of class without authorization. She argued there's no need to prove the child was physically restrained. 

"Their freedom was limited," Lirette told the court. 

Defence lawyer Kim Arial argued the alleged incident simply never happened.

She claimed the Crown failed to provide substantial witnesses. She also also said there were too many gaps in the memory of the child, who only recalled the alleged incident after a CBC article about sexual abuse at the child's school. 

Lirette pointed to several instances in the child's testimony that seemed unclear or added to fill some void in their memory. She said this wasn't done "with bad intention," but to complete the story and to make sense out of it.