SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: R. v. P.D.T., 2012 SCC 62, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 394 Date: 20121109 Docket: 34780 Between: P.D.T. Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Wagner JJ. Reasons for Judgment: (para. 1) McLachlin C.J. (Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Wagner JJ, concurring) R. v . P.D.T., 2012 SCC 62, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 394 P.D.T. Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Indexed as: R. v . P.D.T.

2012 SCC 62 File No.: 34780. 2012: November 9. Present: McLachlin C.J. and Fish, Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Wagner JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta Criminal law — Reasonable verdict — During police interview, accused first denied that he had ever touched complainant in sexual manner, but ultimately admitted to some sexual touching — Complainant’s evidence, combined with accused’s confirmatory admissions, sufficiently supported conviction for sexual interference and sexual exploitation.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (McFadyen, Berger and O’Ferrall JJ.A.), 2012 ABCA 68 , 522 A.R. 297, 544 W.A.C. 297, [2012] A.J. No. 730 (QL), 2012 CarswellAlta 1554, upholding the accused’s convictions for sexual interference and sexual exploitation. Appeal dismissed. Deborah R. Hatch , for the appellant. Maureen J. McGuire , for the respondent. T he judgment of the Court was delivered orally by [ 1 ] The Chief Justice — This is an appeal as of right. The only issue is whether the verdict of guilt was unreasonable.

We agree with the majority of the Court of Appeal that the verdict is not unreasonable. The appeal is dismissed and the conviction affirmed. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the appellant: Gunn Law Group, Edmonton. Solicitor for the respondent : Attorney General of Alberta, Edmonton.