It could happen, for sure. You have to think about the practicalities, and I think that's what we're trying to do. In a situation like that, where the accused is so close in age, within the five years or just over, in what circumstances would a charge be laid in those cases, right? Because the police have to have reasonable grounds that an offence has been committed. They could probably meet that test in this case. Would the crown proceed with a prosecution in that case? Again, they'd have to have a reasonable prospect of securing a conviction. I know the Supreme Court doesn't look favourably on individual police discretion as opposed to the rule of law, but in those circumstances I think police and crown would be exercising some discretion in terms of whether they could meet the burden they would have to meet in that situation.
Of course, those are always going to be the tough cases that are going to come before us. I think in that case, based on how we see cases proceeding, and other sexual assault defences--because no young person wants to be considered a victim in a sexual assault trial, particularly in this type of situation--I can't predict exactly how it would happen. Technically, under the law, the day the older person is five years or more older, it would be an offence. But even today, even before that “five-year” happens, it could possibly be an offence under the existing section 153, because the court's directed to look at the age difference.