Skip to content

Man convicted of sexually assaulting child was on probation for same crime

Conviction handed down on a historic Guelph sexual assault case involving a victim who was age four to six
0
gavel ruling shutterstock
Stock image

A Guelph man who was already on probation for sexually assaulting a child has been found guilty again of the same crime.

Michael Arthur Weil was found guilty of two counts of sexual assault, two counts of sexual touching on a person under the age of 16 and two counts of breaching his probation.

Justice Nancy Mossip handed down the written decision last week.

The conviction of Weil came in part because the sexual assault was very similar to one he committed six years earlier on a seven-year-old child.

The most recent sexual assault took place between 2007 and 2008 when the victim was between age 4 and 6.

They came to light in 2016 when the victim, now in Grade 9, opened up to a school teacher she trusted.

Court documents detail a series of disturbing acts of “sexual misconduct” that included showering with the victim, touching, watching pornography together and having the victim dress up in lingerie and lipstick.

There were other more serious and graphic elements detailed in court.

When the crime occurred Weil had been out of jail for a year after having served seven months of a 13-month jail term for sexually assaulting and making child pornography involving a seven-year-old.

After his release he was placed on three years probation.

Weil was alone with the child when crimes took place even though he was not permitted to be alone with a child without another adult being present.

In delivering her verdict, Justice Mossip found that there were “significant problems with Mr. Weil's testimony, which lead me to disbelieve his denial of wrong-doing. Further, his testimony does not leave me with a reasonable doubt of his guilt.”

The judge found the victim’s testimony credible and that there were similarities between the man’s previous sexual assault conviction, including similar age and making the victim wear lingerie.

“The similar fact evidence can be used by me as additional proof of Mr. Weil's guilt. The evidence was introduced and is accepted by me as evidence of highly specific sexual misconduct of Mr. Weil. This evidence demonstrates Mr. Weil’s propensity to abuse pre-pubescent girls in at least one way by dressing them in adult lingerie and taking pictures.”

Sentencing will follow.