Supreme Court upholds condom-poking conviction against N.S. man who tricked girlfriend into pregnancy


Craig Jaret Hutchinson was convicted of sexual assault after he admitted to sabotaging his girlfriend's condoms with a pin in a bid to get her pregnant.



OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada has unanimously upheld the sexual assault conviction of a Nova Scotia man who tried to trick his girlfriend into becoming pregnant by poking holes in her condoms.

Craig Jaret Hutchinson was sentenced to 18 month in jail in December 2011 after he pierced his girlfriend’s condoms with a pin in 2006 so she would get pregnant and not break up with him.

The Halifax-area woman became pregnant and had an abortion, but later suffered an infection of her uterus that required treatment with antibiotics.

In January 2013, the Nova Scotia Supreme Court rejected his appeal that the sentence was harsh and excessive and that the woman voluntarily consented to having sex with him.

In 2009, Hutchinson was originally found not guilty of aggravated sexual assault by the Nova Scotia Supreme Court.

That decision was overturned by the province’s Appeal Court, which ordered a new trial.



Commentary by the OttawaMensCentre




This supreme Court Decision is remarkable in that for the first time, having sex requires that no fraud take place, it's that "fraud" aspect of this case that is disturbing.
Disturbing because its he first time, a Canadian court has convicted on a charge of sexual assault on the basis of fraud.

The problem is that far more sexual assault , "rape" of men by women" using "fraud" under S.265 (3)(C).

I've met literally hundreds of men who have been victims of "fraud" where the the woman obtained sex by fraud, stating that "she can't get pregnant", "doctors told her its impossible to get pregnant", and "she is on the pill" and or "It's my safe time of the month". "I know my body and I know when I'm ovulating".

In almost all of these cases, the evidence is, she was a pathological liar. These women have personality disorders that include, extreme selfishness, habitual pathological lies, and a desire for "revenge" either against men in general, or because he, wanted to terminate the relationship.

This R.v Hutchinson case is almost identical to the Julian Assange case in Sweden, and it's the kind of case that provides all the advantages of Canadian Criminal and Family Courts to women while denying the same rights to men.

Canada applies "Male Sharia Law", with evidence of she said worth far more than "he said" which most of the time is not worth anything unless it can be corroborated by a host of witnesses and or other evidence and even then, a she said is probably going to win over any evidence no matter what the quality and or quantity.

Women don't require corroboration for a "she said" to gain criminal convictions. Men can't escape phony criminal charges even when they have a stack of witnesses to the contrary.

The bottom line is, Children in Canada, men in Canada, in particular "Canadian Fathers" have next to no legal rights.