REGINA — The province’s top court has ordered a new trial on three of six charges against a former educational assistant convicted of sexually exploiting two 17-year-old boys, citing a “critical” failure in the trial judge’s instructions to the jury.
In a decision released May 25, a three-judge panel of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal set aside Stacey Duke’s conviction related to one of the two complainants, finding the jury wasn’t properly instructed to determine a key element of whether she was still in a position of trust or authority over the teenager at the time.
The court, however, upheld Duke’s conviction for offences involving the second teen.
Duke, who was 37 at the time of the offences in 2022, was originally convicted by a jury on all six counts. The charges included sexual exploitation, making sexually explicit material available to a child, and luring a child.
She was sentenced to 16 months for sexual exploitation and 12 months concurrent for making sexually explicit material available to a child. The child luring charge was stayed.
According to court documents, the charges involved two teenage boys who attended a rural Saskatchewan school where Duke worked in the Prairie Valley School District.
One boy was a current student and Duke regularly helped him one-on-one with his schoolwork. The trial judge’s instructions on that relationship weren’t contested and the conviction was upheld.
The issue was with the second complainant.
He had transferred to a different school nearby approximately three years before the 2022 incidents. Duke never worked at his new school. Duke and the student had not had any contact for at least a year.
But on the night of Oct. 7, 2022, court heard an intoxicated and distraught Duke reached out to him on social media. She admitted sending him an explicit video of herself and engaging in sexually explicit conversations. Her defence lawyer said that she was no longer in a position of trust or authority over him at the time, which is a necessary element of the criminal charges.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge’s instructions to the jury in this case weren’t adequate.
“Given the tenuous connection that remained between Ms. Duke and B.B., which represented the central issue in contention for all three charges, it was incumbent on the trial judge to provide a more detailed explanation of what factors should be considered when determining whether the Crown had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that a relationship of trust existed as of October 7, 2022,” said Justice Jerome A. Tholl, with Justices Neal W. Caldwell and Meghan R. McCreary agreeing.
“In my judgment, it was necessary to provide a further instruction to the jury to carefully and thoroughly consider the specific factors related to the matter in front of them and not to rely on any categorical determinations regarding such a position.”
The Court of Appeal also said that the student had firmly and repeatedly rebuffed Duke’s advances, told multiple people about the messages, and didn’t feel any pressure to comply, which was evidence of his independence that should have been highlighted for the jury.
“As a result of this error, the convictions for the three offences regarding B.B. – counts 4 to 6 of the indictment – should be set aside and a new trial ordered for those three charges,” said Justice Tholl.
The Crown had also appealed Duke’s 16-month sentence, arguing it was demonstrably unfit. The Appeal Court disagreed.
While acknowledging the sentence was “at the bottom of the spectrum,” Justice Tholl found the trial judge made no errors in principle. The judge had properly considered the serious nature of the offences, the need for deterrence, and the mitigating factors, including Duke’s lack of a criminal record, her family support, and the steps she has taken to address her alcohol abuse following the incidents.
“A full reading of the Sentencing Decision reveals that the trial judge fully understood his task, the principles at stake, the gravity of the offences in relation to A.A., and Ms. Duke’s personal level of responsibility in committing them,” he said. “I cannot give effect to this ground of appeal.”
Duke had been released pending the appeal. Since her convictions for the offences against the first student were upheld, the court ordered her to surrender herself into custody at the RCMP detachment in Weyburn no later than 10 a.m. on May 27.
The DNA and sex offender registry orders imposed by the trial judge remain in effect.
