A Saskatchewan principal convicted of sexual assault in 2023 will have another chance to clear his name.

The principal was accused of grabbing a Grade 7 student’s butt in a school hallway in September 2021. He was found guilty of sexual assault and sexual interference.

On April 26, 2023, he was sentenced to six months in jail, followed by two years probation and a host of additional orders as a result of the sexual interference conviction.

The principal appealed his conviction and sentence. On Nov. 12, the appeal was granted by Court of King’s Bench Justice Brenda Hildebrandt. She determined that the trial judge didn’t give sufficient reasons for the conviction and misunderstood the evidence. A new trial will now take place.

The incident took place in September 2021, at the end of the first week of school, in a crowded hallway during a five-minute break between classes. About 40 students and the principal were present at the time.

During the first trial in January 2023, the student stated that on that day, “I had gotten my butt grabbed” while retrieving something from her locker. At the time she was in Grade 7.

During that trial, the defence stated that during that first week, Grade 7 students at the school had been playing a game involving grabbing each other’s butts.

The student didn’t see who grabbed her, but stated that it was the principal “because he was walking away” after it happened.

The principal’s lawyer argued that the accusation was far-fetched. If the principal “wanted to touch a child on the butt, why would he do it in a crowded hallway? Why would he do it where everyone could see it? Why would he do it to a child that he has no relationship to?” they asked during the trial.

Two other students testified that they saw the principal touch the student. As there were no other witnesses, their testimony was key to the initial conviction.

In the appeal decision, Hildebrandt cited evidence questioning the reliability of those witnesses.

She ruled that their testimony was contradictory on who could have seen the incident take place. She also ruled that despite the trial judge’s assertion that there was “virtually no other evidence of a perpetrator,” the testimony proved that the hallway was so crowded at the time that it would have been difficult to make that determination.

The two student witnesses were also friends with the victim, which should have raised questions about whether one witness’s “desire to protect the complainant coloured his narration of events,” according to Hildebrandt.

In light of these errors, Hildebrandt ordered a new trial.

“The apparent reliance on the reliability of the testimony of the three student witnesses, particularly without explanation, amounts, in my view, to a palpable and overriding error,” Hildebrandt’s decision says.

“In addition, there is a failure to address the evidence that members of the Grade 7 class were engaged in a butt-grabbing joke or game, which was ongoing at the pertinent time.”

A date for the new trial has not yet been set.