Markham Sexual Interference Lawyer (Section 151)

Home › Markham Criminal Defence › Markham Sexual Interference

An allegation of sexual touching of a person under 16 is among the most serious accusations a person can face, and among the most carefully defended. Section 151 of the Criminal Code, sexual interference, carries a 14 year maximum, registry consequences and a sentencing climate that appellate courts have deliberately hardened. It is also an offence where the defence has real, structured ground to stand on, because these cases tend to turn on four specific questions, and this page walks through each of them. If you or a family member is facing a section 151 charge in Markham or anywhere in York Region, you are presumed innocent, and the work of holding the Crown to its burden should start immediately. Kazandji Law defends these files with dignity, discretion and senior counsel attention.

By Fadi Matthew Kazandji, Founding Partner, Kazandji Law. Updated July 2026.

What section 151 says, and where it sits in the offence family

Section 151 makes it an offence, for a sexual purpose, to touch, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, any part of the body of a person under the age of 16. It is a hybrid offence: the Crown can proceed by indictment, where the maximum is 14 years, or summarily, where the maximum is two years less a day.

Three drafting details matter. The touching can be direct or indirect. It can be with a part of the body or with an object. And the offence contains no force, coercion or injury element; what it targets is sexual touching of a young person, with consent removed from the analysis by a separate provision discussed below.

Section 151 rarely travels alone. Where an allegation involves a person under 16, Crowns commonly lay sexual assault under section 271 alongside it, and the two charges are defended together with different tools; our Markham sexual assault defence page covers the section 271 side. Where the allegation is about words rather than touching, the charge is invitation to sexual touching under section 152; we have a detailed guide to that offence as well. Allegations involving 16 and 17 year olds within relationships of trust or authority proceed as sexual exploitation under section 153, and online communication cases are usually charged as child luring under section 172.1.

For the whole map of these offences and how they interlock, see our Markham sexual offence lawyer page, which is the umbrella for this family. This page does one job inside that map: it takes the four questions that actually decide a section 151 file in York Region and works through them in order.

Question one: did the touching happen, and was it for a sexual purpose?

Most section 151 trials are decided here.

On the first half of the question, the evidence is usually testimonial. Many files begin with a young person's disclosure to a parent, teacher, counsellor or friend, sometimes soon after the events alleged, often much later. York Regional Police's Special Victims Unit then conducts forensic interviews, which are recorded, structured conversations designed to capture the young person's account. The defence obtains and dissects every layer of that record: what was disclosed first and to whom, how the account developed across retellings, what questions were asked and how, and whether adult assumptions, family conflict or repeated questioning shaped what a child came to say.

Saying that is not an attack on any child. Courts themselves recognize that children's memory and suggestibility require care, and that reliability, meaning how accurate an account is, differs from sincerity, meaning how honestly it is given. A defence can fully respect a young witness and still demonstrate that an account cannot safely support a conviction. That is the standard we hold these files to, respectfully and without theatrics.

On the second half, sexual purpose, context is everything. Contact within families, caregiving, sports coaching and roughhousing can be entirely innocent, and the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the specific touching alleged was for a sexual purpose. Where the contact alleged is ambiguous, purpose is often the central battleground: the setting, what was said, the relationship, the nature of the contact and the surrounding conduct all bear on it. Raising those issues is not an accusation against anyone; it is what the element requires.

The investigative file, statements, interview recordings, officer notes, messages between the adults involved and timelines, is where both halves of this question get tested. We read all of it, line by line, because that is where reasonable doubt usually lives.

Question two: what are the ages, exactly?

Section 151 protects people under 16, and the complainant's age at the time of the alleged touching is an element the Crown must prove. But the age question runs deeper than the element itself, because of section 150.1.

Consent is removed. Under section 150.1(1), it is not a defence that the complainant consented to the activity. For a section 151 allegation, agreement, initiation or an ongoing relationship does not answer the charge.

Two close-in-age exceptions exist, and they are exact. Where the complainant was 12 or 13, consent can be a defence only if the accused was less than two years older. Where the complainant was 14 or 15, consent can be a defence only if the accused was less than five years older. Both exceptions apply only where the accused was not in a position of trust or authority towards the complainant, was not a person with whom the complainant was in a relationship of dependency, and was not in a relationship with the complainant that was exploitative of the complainant. In peer-aged York Region files, the arithmetic, run precisely from birth dates, can decide whether a viable charge exists at all.

Young accused persons are treated differently. A 12 or 13 year old cannot be tried for this offence at all unless they were in a position of trust, authority, dependency or exploitation toward the complainant. And any accused aged 12 to 17 proceeds under the Youth Criminal Justice Act in youth court, which sits at the same Newmarket courthouse that handles adult York Region matters. Youth files carry their own privacy protections, procedures and sentencing principles, and a teenager facing a peer allegation needs youth-specific defence from the first day.

Families are often shocked that these charges can arise from teenage relationships. The bands above are the law's answer, and applying them accurately, early, is one of the first things we do in every file.

Question three: what did you know, or try to find out, about age?

Where the parties did not know each other well, age can be the whole case. The Criminal Code deals with mistaken belief in section 150.1(4): a belief that the complainant was 16 or older is not a defence unless the accused took all reasonable steps to ascertain the complainant's age.

The leading Supreme Court of Canada decision is R. v. George (2017). At trial, the accused was acquitted of sexual interference and sexual assault involving a 14 year old complainant: the judge found the activity factually consensual, the belief about age honest, and the Crown's case insufficient to prove a failure to take all reasonable steps. An appeal court set the acquittals aside; the Supreme Court restored them. The enduring point is about burden: once the mistake-of-age defence is realistically in play on the evidence, the Crown must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

What counts as all reasonable steps depends on the facts: what the person said about their age and how consistently, how they appeared, the setting where the parties met, what school or work details were shared, what online profiles showed, and whether anything in the picture should have prompted more questions. Steps that suffice in one context will not suffice in another, and the analysis is anchored to what was known at the time, not to hindsight.

One connected rule: a person cannot rely on a mistaken belief about the complainant's age to access the close-in-age exceptions described above unless all reasonable steps were taken there as well.

Evidence for this defence has a shelf life. Profiles change, accounts get deleted, and memories of who said what fade. Preserving the record immediately, screenshots, threads and witness recollections included, is one of the most valuable things a person can do in the first days of a file, and one of the first things we direct.

Question four: if the Crown proves its case, what actually follows?

The fourth question is about stakes, and it deserves straight answers.

Route	Maximum sentence	Minimum printed in the Code
Indictment	14 years	One year
Summary conviction	Two years less a day	90 days

Friesen is the sentencing reality in every Ontario courtroom: in 2020 the Supreme Court directed that sentences for sexual offences against children must increase, and that direction is applied daily. So a realistic conversation about exposure looks at the whole picture: the route the Crown takes, the circumstances alleged, your record and the mitigation that can properly be built.

Beyond sentence, four consequences get planned for from day one.

The registry. Sexual interference is a primary offence under the federal Sex Offender Information Registration Act scheme. An order is mandatory in defined circumstances, including an indictable conviction with a sentence of two years or more for an offence against a person under 18, and presumptive otherwise unless strict statutory exceptions are established. Duration typically runs 20 years on indictment and 10 years on summary conviction. Ontario's Christopher's Law registry is separate.

Section 161 orders. For an offence against a person under 16, the court must consider prohibitions on attending parks, pools, playgrounds, daycares and schoolgrounds, on positions of trust or authority over people under 16, on contact with anyone under 16 without approved supervision, and on internet use except on court-set conditions, for any period up to life, variable later on changed circumstances.

The publication ban. A section 486.4 order protecting the complainant's identity is mandatory when requested by the complainant or the Crown. It does not protect the accused.

Other ancillary orders. Additional orders commonly accompany conviction for offences in this family; which ones apply, and for how long, is assessed on your facts, and each can matter to work, family life and travel.

The evidence rules specific to sexual offence trials

Section 151 proceedings run under the Criminal Code's sexual offence evidence regimes, and they shape the defence from the first month.

Section 276 bars evidence of the complainant's other sexual activity when offered for two prohibited inferences, toward consent or toward credibility, and the provision treats communications made for a sexual purpose as sexual activity. Text messages and social media threads the defence considers important can require a formal application and judicial screening before use.

Sections 278.92 to 278.94 govern records relating to the complainant that are in the accused's possession: counselling notes, medical records, journals, private messages and similar material. Using them at trial requires a written application decided at a pre-trial hearing in which the complainant has standing and may appear with counsel. The Supreme Court upheld this scheme in R. v. J.J. (2022).

The practical meaning for anyone charged is that sexual offence defences are front-loaded and written. Deadlines, thresholds and draft applications determine what a judge or jury will ever hear. Evidence that genuinely assists the defence is often admissible, but only through the proper gate, framed the proper way, on time. Files that drift toward trial without this work done arrive hollow. Ours do not.

The York Region process, condensed

Investigation. First response in Markham typically runs through York Regional Police 5 District at 8700 McCowan Road, with sexual offence investigations handled by YRP's Special Victims Unit. YRP also operates an online sexual assault reporting portal, which is one reason allegations, including historical ones, can surface months or years after the events alleged. Arrests are frequently planned rather than immediate: an invitation to attend for an interview, or officers arriving once the investigation is largely assembled. If that call comes, the right answer is polite silence and a phone call to counsel, not an explanation.

Release and bail. Sexual interference is not among the offences reserved to the Superior Court for bail, so release is addressed at the Ontario Court of Justice in Newmarket. In a community like Markham, where the parties often share schools, teams, plazas, faith communities and extended households, conditions need careful tailoring, and overbroad terms can and should be challenged or varied. Toronto works differently, with adult bail running through a dedicated bail centre; our Toronto bail lawyers page explains that system for anyone with a file on both sides of Steeles.

The courthouse. Every York Region criminal charge proceeds at 50 Eagle Street West in Newmarket. The Ontario Court of Justice handles first appearances, disclosure, Crown and judicial pre-trials, and summary trials; the Superior Court of Justice sits in the same building for indictable matters, including jury trials. Because the indictable maximum is 14 years, a preliminary inquiry is available on request where the Crown proceeds by indictment. Many case-management appearances proceed virtually, which reduces Markham-to-Newmarket travel.

Interpreters are available at the courthouse, and we arrange them for meetings as well. Our Thornhill office at 7191 Yonge Street, Suite 310 serves Markham and all of York Region.

Defending with care: rigour without victim-blaming

A section 151 defence has to do two things at once: test every element of the Crown's case without flinching, and treat the complainant, usually a young person, with dignity throughout. We built our practice on the conviction that these are the same job done properly.

Rigour looks like this. The complete Special Victims Unit file dissected line by line. Forensic interviews analyzed against the disclosure history. Timelines rebuilt independently. The close-in-age and reasonable steps issues run precisely. Expert evidence, on memory and suggestibility or on digital forensics, retained where warranted. And Charter litigation, over statements, device seizures and searches, and delay under section 11(b), pursued wherever the investigation cut corners.

Care looks like this. Cross-examination that is surgical rather than punishing. No myths, no stereotypes, no victim-blaming theories. A defence narrative that does not require anyone to be a villain, only the evidence to be insufficient. Judges and juries trust defences that are honest about what they are and are not saying, and that trust is an asset for the person we represent.

Some files resolve; where instructions and evidence point that way, the negotiation is about route, charge and the long consequences described above. Some files must be tried, and we prepare every file as though it will be. Our work on serious allegations is documented on our results page.

Why York Region families call Kazandji Law

Sexual offence files at Kazandji Law are led personally by Fadi Matthew Kazandji, the firm's founding partner. You deal with senior counsel directly, from the first confidential conversation through trial or resolution.

For Markham clients, our Thornhill office at 7191 Yonge Street, Suite 310 is the local base, and we appear regularly at the Newmarket courthouse. The firm serves the GTA from four offices: Toronto headquarters at 180 John Street, Unit 320; Thornhill for Markham and York Region; North York; and Oakville. Consultations are free and confidential, with evening, weekend and virtual options, and interpreters arranged where needed.

These files reward early, senior attention: accounts preserved before they disappear, bail conditions negotiated rather than endured, applications built on time, and consequences like the registry and section 161 orders planned for rather than discovered. If York Regional Police have contacted you, or someone you love has been charged, the best time to involve counsel is now. Our Markham criminal defence hub outlines everything we defend in York Region.

Historical allegations: when the events alleged are years old

A meaningful share of York Region section 151 files are historical. YRP's online reporting portal and the way disclosure actually happens in families mean a person can be contacted about events alleged to have occurred five, ten or twenty years ago. The shock of that phone call is hard to overstate, and so is the importance of handling it correctly.

The legal framework does not soften with time: the same elements, the same burden of proof and the same presumption of innocence apply. What changes is the evidence. Memories on all sides have been reworked by years of retelling and by adult reinterpretation of childhood events. Households, relationships and loyalties have shifted, and sometimes the shift itself is part of the story of how an allegation emerged. Records that could have confirmed or refuted details, class lists, schedules, photographs, medical notes, old messages, may be gone, or may still exist if someone moves quickly to find them.

Historical defence work is therefore reconstruction work. We build the timeline independently: where people actually lived, who was present in which years, what the physical spaces looked like, what the documented record still shows. Precision about dates and places matters enormously, because the account the Crown relies on must hold together against the fixed points that documents establish.

Two practical notes. First, being contacted about a historical allegation is exactly the moment to say nothing and call counsel; investigators often invite a statement precisely because the file needs one. Second, release conditions in historical files are usually manageable, and the real fight is the trial record, which is built over months, not days.

What the first meeting with us actually looks like

People arrive at a first meeting frightened, and often carrying a week of internet research. Here is what actually happens.

We listen first. The whole story, in your words, protected by privilege. Then we read what you have: the information or undertaking, any release paperwork, the police contact history, and whatever messages or records touch the allegation. From that, we can usually identify which of the four questions on this page your case will turn on, and say so plainly.

Then the immediate steps get assigned. Preservation: screenshots, threads, account exports, names of people who can speak to key facts, all gathered before anything disappears. Conditions: if your release terms are unworkable, with a shared school or household in the mix, we plan a variation rather than letting you live one mistake away from a new charge. Disclosure: we request the full investigative file and follow up until it is complete. And communication: from that point, police and the Crown talk to us, not to you.

You leave with three things: a realistic map of the road ahead, a short list of what to do and what to avoid, and a direct line to the lawyer handling your file. The consultation is free, confidential and carries no obligation. What it buys you is the end of guessing.

A note for parents, spouses and the people standing beside the accused

Most calls we receive about section 151 charges come from a family member, not the person charged. If that is you, three things are worth knowing.

First, your conversations with the accused are not privileged the way conversations with counsel are. Loving, panicked debriefs about what did or did not happen can turn family members into witnesses. Support the person; leave the details of the allegation for their lawyer's office.

Second, you may have a role in the release plan. Sureties in York Region files are often parents or spouses, and a well prepared surety, someone who understands the conditions and can credibly supervise them, changes bail outcomes. We prepare sureties properly rather than sending them into court cold.

Third, take care of the practical ground: preserve household records and devices lawfully, keep routines steady for children in the home, and route every police contact to counsel. Families who organize early carry these cases far better than families who improvise.

The presumption of innocence belongs to your person too. Holding onto it, out loud, matters more than most people realize.

Markham sexual interference FAQ

This page provides general information about Canadian criminal law for people facing or researching charges in Ontario. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create a lawyer and client relationship with Kazandji Law. The law summarized here, including Criminal Code provisions, penalties and case law, changes over time and is applied to specific facts in every case. Speak with a qualified criminal defence lawyer about your own situation before making decisions. If you have been charged, contact counsel promptly.