Closing submissions

Closing submissions were given by the defence and crown counsel Wednesday in the Penticton trial of an Oliver man facing charges of sexual abuse.

TJB*, 23, has pleaded not guilty to charges of sexual interference of a person under 16, invitation to sexual touching and sexual assault tied to incidents that allegedly took place from June 2011 to the summer of 2012, with a young boy.

In order to protect the identity of the alleged victim, there is a publication ban in place.

In his submission, defence lawyer Michael Welsh said the court has to look at whether there are internal inconsistencies, exaggerations and lies in the testimony of the boy.

There are instances of major inconsistencies, with firstly the complainant's allegations ballooning on a number of occasions, related to the sexual activities he said took place.

Other significant evidence was the boy said TJB showed him pornography, but in cross examination he admitted that didn't happen.

There were furthermore a number of instances where he exaggerated or admitted he lied, because he is a boy who likes to tell stories, embellish stories and make stories up because they make him the centre of attention, said Welsh.

One of these instances was in respect to fireworks, where he told a police officer of a close brush with fireworks one New Year's Eve, then admitted in court that never happened.

The boy also said consistently that TJB would put him on his knee, however, TJB's friend said it was the other way round in his testimony..

Furthermore, in relation to that same friend, this was one of the few occasions when another witness was around and regarding allegations of inappropriate conduct,  the friend said, "no there was not."

In addition, there was evidence the boy was afraid of TJB, yet he was still texting him as late as January of 2013, trying to get credit card information, said Welsh.

In terms of how the boy acted when he appeared by video as a witness, Welsh said he seemed to be enjoying testifying. That only changed when the cross exam began, he said.

"He went from that to being sullen, because he was being caught up in lies," he said.

In regards to testimony by the boy's father, Welsh said his view of all the events was seen through the lens of the firm belief that TJB abused his son. The mother, who also testified, was also was looking at it in retrospect and seeing things differently.

On the other hand, TJBs evidence was presented clearly and was consistent. He described his relationship as being a big brother, who was concerned for the boy's well being and helping the family as a whole.

The friend witness supported TJBs evidence as did that given by TJB's mother, said Welsh.

She believes her son to not be guilty and gave clear evidence of what she observed between the complainant and TJB.

In her closing, crown counsel Catherine Crockett said the time period for the alleged offences was from June of 2011 to the summer of 2012, and that the boy later told his father about them.

The complainant, she said, was a careful and honest witness in keeping with his age and that his characterization of different offences had a ring of truth.

Furthermore, the fact that he learned such words as dry humping or sexual assault from his father was a perfectly natural way to learn.

There is nothing nefarious about that, a child that age wouldn't know those words, she explained.

In terms of the evidence he gave about TJB showing him pornography and then agreeing in cross examination that wasn't true, Crockett said he did admit that he looked at porn for a few minutes on his iPod.

When his mother caught him, he said TJB put it there.

He did admit he lied, said Crockett, and it makes sense why he would lie, he doesn't want to get in trouble for looking at porn.

That was the only point he was shaken on, she added. The other points he was clear on. There was a reason for him to lie about the pornography, no reason for him to lie about other things.

She stated there was also no evidence he was coached in any way, and there appears to be no motive for his parents to ask him to lie.

She described the parents as giving good evidence, saying the boy's mother was very careful, initially encouraging the relationship, thinking it would be good for her son.

She described things starting out fine, Crockett stated, but that it began getting where TJB would stick to the child like glue.

In TJB's evidence, on the other hand, he tried to minimize the contact between the two. In his evidence, the accused also insisted the relationship ended July 15, 2012, after a fight at TJB's mother's house.

But other witnesses said he did have contact with the boy after this date.

In other evidence, TJB said he was the one who initiated a conversation with the principal at the boy's school about his contact with him, (the boy), while volunteering there.

The principal clearly stated in evidence given on Tuesday, that he initiated the conversation.

TJB was also asked in cross examination if he had lunch with the complainant at school and he said no. But his mother confirmed he told her he had done so.

When the crown suggested he was generous with the boy, he said he was generous with the whole family. Again he was trying to minimize the relationship, suggested Crockett.

The evidence given by TJB's mother wasn't particularly troubling, and was actually helpful, Crockett explained.

She stated that she, (his mother), believes her son is not guilty, so is motivated in her evidence to put him in the best possible light.

During his comments, following Crockett's submission, Welsh said, he, (TJB), is being accused of a horrible sexual crime, so he is defending himself against charges.

TJB denied all the allegations against him, when the trial started in August.

The boy earlier testified about being told to masturbate TJB and being involved in such activities as dry humping and anal sex.

After hearing the submissions, Justice Catherine Bruce said she would not be giving a judgement Wednesday. The case was set over to Oct. 20 to fix a date.

*this story has been modified to comply with a court ordered publication ban