In another case of truth being stranger than fiction, last Friday the Canada Supreme Court upheld the conviction of man convicted of sexual assault for poking holes into his girlfriend's stock of condoms and then impregnating her when, predictably, one of those condoms failed. This ruling settled a long running case that raised questions on whether "contraception deception" and withholding vital information amounts to sexual assault. Craig Jaret Hutchinson, 43, was sentenced to 18 months in prison in December of 2011 for piercing the condoms with a pin in 2006. The Canada court, when explaining the theory behind the ruling offered the following ..,"The accused's condom sabotage constituted fraud...the result that no consent [for the sexual relations] was obtained" . The victim in the case became impregnated by Hutchinson, had an abortion, and suffered harmful medical aftereffects of the procedure. Apparently, the impetus behind Hutchinson's action was to impregnate his girlfriend because he thought the relationship was cooling and was in fear of losing her. Personally, I would have opted for flowers and perhaps a box of candy. But sexual assault? I don't know about that one. While I understand that what the defendant did was quite dastardly I hardly think that it would rise to the level of a sexual assault. If this case was to be decided in the States and it were to stand that "withholding vital information" could constitute sexual assault...wow...what a "pandora's box" that would open. While I knew things were a little different in Canada I just can't get my head around this ruling. Be careful out there.