Insists actions not for sexual purposeHe said none of his actions were done for a sexual purpose and denied cupping or rubbing any of the complainants breasts, as some of them alleged. Carey said, in essence, that a reasonable observer would not perceive "a sexual purpose" in Trachy's actions. Now, Gourley said, the Crown was saying sexual purpose made no difference because Trachy was guilty just based on his admitted actions. 'Legally untenable'"The trial judge was entitled to take sexual purpose as important or not important in his discretion," Gourley said. Justice Mary Lou Benotto, also on the appeals panel, suggested the trial judge was only concerned about the "sexual purpose" of Trachy's actions, and not the "sexual nature."

Source: CBC News May 15, 2019 02:03 UTC