<div>My name is Elisha Bonnis. I am seeking support to pursue an appeal in a civil sexual battery case in British Columbia.


</div>

<div><br />

</div>

<div>While the Vancouver Police Department Sex Crimes investigators did recommend a charge of sexual assault, the Crown Counsel declined to charge based on requiring a 95% probability of conviction before they will even charge. B.C. is one of only three provinces in Canada in which the police do not charge - they make a recommendation to the Crown, and then the Crown decides. B.C. also requires the highest standard of evidence than any other province in Canada before they will bring a charge of<span> sexual assault - higher, in fact, than the Canadian Criminal Code requires. </span>

</div>

<div><br />

</div>

<div>This is why a civil trial was my only other legal option.

</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>After a month-long trial, the court found:


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<ul>


<li>no consent.


</li>


<li>no capacity to consent.


</li>


</ul>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Despite these findings, the case was dismissed based on a conclusion that the defendant had a “reasonable belief” that I consented.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>That finding depended almost exclusively on the defendant’s testimony, despite the evidentiary record containing multiple prior inconsistent statements by the defendant between 2016 and the trial in October 2025. The trial judge failed to address those inconsistencies in her judgment, and [58] "found both parties to be not only sincere, but also consistent in their testimony, as far as their recollections were able to support. No deliberate falsehoods were revealed against either of them".


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>For the first time ever in Canadian law, a case in which no consent and no capacity to consent were found, the defendant has been found to have “a reasonable but mistaken belief in consent”. 


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><strong>Why I Am Asking for Help</strong>


</div>


<div>I continue to have pro bono legal representation for my appeal, meaning my lawyer is prepared to take this case forward without charging fees.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>However, I am responsible for the cost of trial transcripts and required disbursements, which are essential for the appeal to proceed.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Without these materials, the Court of Appeal cannot review the case.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Without transcripts, the appeal cannot be heard.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>After:


</div>


<div>•	three cancelled trials


</div>


<div>•	a month-long trial


</div>


<div>•	over $150,000 in legal costs


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>I do not have the resources to continue without support.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>See the article for more detail regarding the adjourned and cancelled trials:


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><a href="https://todayinbc.com/2024/01/29/she-sought-justice-for-sexual-assault-bcs-judge-shortage-became-her-battle/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">She Sought Justice for Sexual Assault</a>


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><strong>Why the Cost Is So High</strong>


</div>


<div>Because my trial lasted a full month and involved extensive evidence, the transcripts are significantly longer than in a typical case.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>For example, testimony and cross-examination alone spanned six full days, in addition to the defendant’s testimony, expert evidence, and lengthy cross-examinations.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>In British Columbia, transcripts are charged per page, and multi-day testimony can result in thousands of pages.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Even when ordering only the essential portions of the trial, the cost is expected to be in the range of:


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>$15,000 - $20,000


</div>

<div>Add to that court fees, filing fees, etc. and the appeal itself will be another $20,000.

</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>These transcripts are mandatory. Without them, the Court of Appeal cannot assess whether legal errors were made.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>The costs including further disbursements that come along with an appeal will be in the range of:


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>$20,000 - $40,000


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Although I have legal representation, these costs are not covered. This means that even with a lawyer ready to argue the appeal, I cannot move forward without funding for these required materials.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><strong><em>This means that whether the appeal proceeds depends not on the merits of the case, but on the ability to afford the required materials.</em></strong>


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><strong><em>Why This Matters</em></strong>


</div>


<div>This case raises broader issues about:


</div>


<div>•	consent and capacity in the context of intoxication


</div>


<div>•	how courts assess conflicting evidence


</div>


<div>•	whether access to justice depends on financial means


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Appeals are meant to ensure that legal errors can be reviewed.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>But if they cannot be accessed due to cost, that safeguard becomes out of reach.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><strong>How You Can Help</strong>


</div>


<div>Your support will go directly toward:


</div>


<div>•	trial transcripts


</div>


<div>•	required appeal disbursements


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Even small contributions make a difference:


</div>


<div>•	$25 helps cover transcript pages


</div>


<div>•	$50 supports key evidence transcription


</div>


<div>•	$100+ directly moves the appeal forward


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>If you are able to contribute or share, it would mean a great deal.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Even with a lawyer ready to argue the appeal, it cannot proceed without these materials.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>Your support will directly make it possible for the appeal to be heard.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div><strong>From the Reasons for Judgment:</strong>


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[92] Given that the plaintiff cannot recall what happened after she got in her bed, the defendant was the only witness present who can testify about what happened in this period. This is circumstantial evidence, but, as I have explained, it is relevant to consent, as well as whether the defendant had a reasonable belief in consent.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[123] Accordingly, I am unable to find that the defendant has


</div>


<div>proven on a balance of probabilities that the plaintiff subjectively consented to the sexual contact.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[126] In this case, I accept that the defendant subjectively believed that the plaintiff was consenting to the sexual activity. He testified credibly: "I had no doubt in my mind she was consenting."


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[132] It is uncontroverted that the ostensive reason they were in the taxi together was that he was making sure she got home safe. Whether that would reasonably involve him getting out of the taxi and walking her to her apartment depends in part on how intoxicated she was. She says she was extremely intoxicated. He says she did not appear to be so.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[142] I return, again, to the plaintiff's evidence that she repeatedly told the defendant throughout the night that nothing sexual would happen between them.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[146] I do not accept that the plaintiff said this as many times as she recalls she did. The defendant does not recall her doing so.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[148] Saying it once is enough.


</div>


<div>That is an unequivocal statement of her subjective intention and wish, and it was known to the defendant. This is a significant factor in determining the defendant's "position" in assessing whether a reasonable person in his position would have later believed the plaintiff was consenting to sexual activity.


</div>


<div>While the defendant has not proven that the plaintiff did, with capacity, change her mind, the law leaves open to him to establish that a reasonable person in his position would believe she had changed her mind.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[156] While I find the defendant did touch the plaintiff sexually without her consent because she did not have the capacity to consent, I find that the defendant has established the defence that he held a reasonable belief that the plaintiff consented.


</div>


<div>This means he is not liable for the losses the plaintiff has suffered as a result of the non-consensual sexual touching.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[157] This determination must not be taken to minimize the very serious suffering and loss the plaintiff has suffered because the defendant touched her sexually without her consent because she did not have the capacity to consent. Since the night at issue, the plaintiff has withdrawn from her thriving social and professional life, sold her home in Vancouver, retreated to increasing isolation, and ultimately left the teaching job she loved and at which she was beloved by her students and respected by her colleagues. She observes that almost half of her son’s life has been impacted by her own attempts to avoid, then confront, reconcile with, and seek justice for what happened to her. She began to harm herself physically by excoriation. She neglects her home and possessions, allowing, for example, boxes full of curriculum and teaching materials she had worked for years to produce and collect to disintegrate in the rain. While she recently began teaching again in a new district, she is only rebuilding her life slowly. She has the support of a new partner


</div>


<div>and family and friends who love her. But she continues to suffer from the very real violation of her personal integrity. That the defendant held a reasonable belief in her consent does not diminish the violation the plaintiff experienced because she did not consent to the sexual activity: “Having control over who touches one’s body, and how, lies at the core of human dignity and autonomy”: Ewanchuk at para. 28.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[293] For the reasons I have explained, I dismiss the claim and the counterclaim.


</div>


<div><br />


</div>


<div>[294] In these circumstances, the parties shall bear their own costs.


</div>

Nola Richardson

Charles Demers

LINDA GLASS

Anonymous

Kandice Keith

Alisa Desilets

Rachel Bueckert

Xan Dagenais

Yvette Lalonde

azhda mehrpoor

Ravijot Dhillon

Kate Tauber

Melanie Gibb

Kundalata James

Jolie Regehr

Help Fund Appeal in Sexual Battery Case – Access to Justice

platform

Platform is iOS

Android

Adyen Google Pay Development Audience

$opt_dummy_attribute

English only

Deprecate Stripe Legacy

dyn_template_ids

Adyen V6 Bene Transfer & MyMoney Campaign Organizers - test01

Bene transfer V6 and AdyenV6MyMoney Campaign Organizers - production

OneTrust next-app audience

fundCountryCode

NextDoor Share Option Users

Fundraisers with Reactions feature capability

fundCurrencyCode

US + Non-charity COs Only

locale

fund country is US and user language is English

personId

comms-internal-person-ids

Enhanced Story Experience Users

Suggested Goal Experience Users

user language is English and fund country: US, AU, DK, FI, IE, NO, SE, CA, GB; 

Poster share - new funds eligible (newest 9/18)

Streaming widgets beta user

paymentProcessor

3DS payment method

user language is English and fundCountry: US, AU, DK, FI, IE, NO, SE, CA, GB; 

GoFundMe Employees

ipAddress

Mark Rieth IP Address

Version 9.2.0 and above

Fund is in English speaking country

desktop

Android v12.11.0 and above

Platform is Android

paymentMethodType

checkoutType

Payment method type group to be vaulted on success

admin pr kit prod

EUR Donation Upsell

Share Text generation Skip Fundraiser

(prod) new funds eligible for amp12 (UGC gallery)

fintrac_cad_idv_form_v2 audience

paymentProcessorAccountId

fallback mode accounts

proCampaignId

p2p legacy startfundraising page

AMP24 New Funds Only PROD (DO NOT MODIFY)

countryCode

charityId

UKCharities

Federated Search Internal Testing

route.pathname community

US Donation Upsell audience 

Auto Thanks Feature Audience

Supporter Comments Eligible Funds

International Only

fundId

braze fundraiser group 

Payment Identity Transfers ATO Risk Check (Targeted) - Production

Fundraiser Saved Payment Method Rate Limit Bypass (Production)

leaderboard-partner-id-audience-givepanel

Version 9.2.1 and above

AUD Donation Upsell audience

fundraiserCountryCode is US/EN

Active Fundraiser - Smart Default Cadence

DAF Internal

Vault on success card payment method

Platform is iOS v11.0.0 and above

Desktop users

Person ids

United States (US) users

allow yuno fundraisers for test

Mexico country code

Posters INTL

NPO Profile Opted-In

iOS at or above 12.4.0

non-US recurring donors

Canada Campaign Owner Group

Fundraiser Without Meta Link

Scheduler payment tester gorup

charityCommunityId

Charities allow to be claimed unclaimed (PRD)

Canada (CA) users

currencyCode

UC Tipping v20250115 International

pymk_production_xplr_fe_team

Android at or above 12.2.0

Profile photo entry point audience

smart goals (fundraiser/manage) on test01

Activity Tracking v1 Beta Testing

writePath

Stream Notification

start gfm intl allowed locales

Platform is iOS v11.2.0 and above

prod_ach_audience

AI Chatbot Audience

amp13 only new funds (prod) (anyword auto)

UC Flow Enabled (Prod)

Payment Identity Beneficiary Verification - Production

shared notification bell audience

Custom users

ach frontend audience

Android v11.0.0 and above

Users Receiving Payments Paused Notifications

smart goals test01

Manage Coach - US English Organizers Only + new funds only

Team EGG - IP Address list

Fundraiser Without Instagram Deep Link

Native 11.4.0 and above

UC Tipping v20250107

Users Receiving Braze KYC Validation Failed

Native 11.3.0 and above

Influencer - Prod

US fundraisers and US users

Native 11.4.0 and higher

ai_title_page

anyword

openai

control

manual_entry

userEmail

template_id

userId

fundUrl

isCharityCo

email

appVersion

shouldBucketIntoExperiment

partnerId

donationCadence

isActiveFundraiser

isPartner

isMobile

npoProfileOptIn

fundIsLinkedWithMeta

hasSessionDonation

isCampaignOwner

fundHasInstagramDeepLink

New funds eligible - Video Sharing (PROD)

GB Donation Upsell audience 

Auto Thanks V3 Rollout Audience

Thank you V3 testing whitelist

isRecurringFriendly

Is Recurring Friendly

Excluded funds - Video Sharing

Logged In Users

CH Donation Upsell audience

Android v10.6.0 and above

userCurrencyCode

Localized Currency

v11.5.0 and above

testAudience

pathname

Survicate

appVersion is at or above 12.8.0

Non-charity fund

isChallengeFundraiser

challenge-fundraisers

Payment Identity Launch Verification - Production

New funds eligible - Posters v2

CAD Donation Upsell Audience

Braze Email Tester

NPO Profile Opted-Out

iOS App Version

hasKnownDonors

PYMK has donors

iOS v12.3.0 and above

Help Fund Appeal in Sexual Battery Case – Access to Justice

Still $6,214 to go. Help us build momentum.