New trial ordered for man convicted of sexual assault

A Nunavut man convicted of sexual assault has had his request for a retrial granted by the Nunavut Court of Appeal after fresh evidence came to light.

In their ruling released Thursday, appeal court justices Suzanne Duncan, Alice Woolley and Kevin Feth agreed the new evidence could have affected the outcome of Johnny Ukuqtunnuaq’s sexual assault trial had it been available at the time and therefore the case should be retried.

The appeal court ruling does not identify the community where the sexual assault is alleged to have taken place, or include the ages of the complainant or Ukuqtunnuaq.

Ukuqtunnuaq was convicted in July 2024 of sexually assaulting a woman in her home while she was sleeping on the night of Dec. 21, 2021.

During his trial, Ukuqtunnuaq admitted the woman’s accusation because he had “no recollection of the evening in question as he was intoxicated,” the appeal judges’ statement read.

At his trial, Ukuqtunnuaq was found guilty of sexual assault because the complainant was unconscious at the time and could not have provided consent.

The woman cannot be identified due to a court-ordered publication ban.

Ukuqtunnuaq was sentenced to 30 months in custody.

The appeal court decision said lawyers for Ukuqtunnuaq sought a retrial due to fresh evidence — testimony from a family member that contradicts the complainant’s evidence and was not available during Ukuqtunnuaq’s trial.

The family member, who lived with the complainant, said that on the night in question the woman’s door was left partially open and he saw her and Ukuqtunnuaq having sex.

“The complainant was on top and the appellant [Ukuqtunnuaq] on the bottom. Both of them looked at [the family member]. He then left the house. As he was leaving, he heard the complainant begin to yell and tell the appellant to go away,” the appeal court judges’ ruling said.

The family member said he did not know about Ukuqtunnuaq’s charges and trial until after Ukuqtunnuaq was incarcerated. It was then that he told Ukuqtunnuaq what he had witnessed.

The appeal judges’ ruling said that in order to admit fresh evidence, certain criteria must be met. The new evidence must bear “upon a decisive or potentially decisive issue in the trial.” It must be credible, and if it is determined the evidence could have had an impact on the outcome of the trial it should be accepted for inclusion.

Ukuqtunnuaq’s conviction hinged on the testimony of the complainant, the ruling said, and the new evidence contradicts that testimony.

“If believed, the evidence could reasonably be expected to have impacted the outcome of the proceeding,” the judges ruled.

No date has been set yet for a new trial.