STATEMENT FROM MURPHY BATTISTA LLP REGARDING THE IVAN HENRY DECISION

VANCOUVER, BC, Feb. 6, 2025 /CNW/ - In 2017, five of Ivan Henry's sexual assault victims commenced a civil suit against their assaulter. This suit follows Henry's 1983 criminal trial, his 2010 appeal and his 2015 Charter damages trial. 

Yesterday, Madam Justice Gropper of the Supreme Court of British Columbia released the decision in A.B. v. Henry, 2025 BCSC 137, confirming what these five remarkably brave women have said for over four decades: Ivan Henry was the man who sexually assaulted each of them.

For these five women, the legal process has been a long and arduous journey. All were sexually assaulted in similar circumstances. All were young women, living on their own in Vancouver. All were sexually assaulted at knifepoint by a stranger, Ivan Henry, who broke into their homes. No person should ever have to endure what they went through.

Justice Gropper's 207-page decision undertakes a thorough and careful review of the evidence presented during the three-and-a-half-month-long trial, that took place in 2024, before reaching these fundamental conclusions:

[839] Individually, each plaintiff has met her burden: to establish that Mr. Henry is the man who attacked her, on the balance of probabilities. They each have proven that it is more likely than not that Mr. Henry committed these sexual assaults.

[840] I have reviewed the identification evidence of each of the plaintiffs, as well as the surrounding evidence: Jessie Henry's statement, similar fact evidence, Ivan Henry's M.O., and the similarities among these five offences. The evidence that I must weigh against the evidence of Mr. Henry is his denial. I have found that Mr. Henry is not a credible witness. I do not accept his denials over the plaintiffs' evidence.

For background, all five women gave evidence at a preliminary inquiry in 1982. Four of the five also gave evidence at his 1983 criminal trial. As Mr. Henry chose to represent himself, they were subjected to being cross-examined by the man who sexually assaulted them.

When the case was re-opened in the 2000s, the victims were left voiceless. During the special prosecutor's review, Mr. Henry's appeal, and Mr. Henry's civil suit against various levels of government, the sexual assault victims were not heard from. There was significant scrutiny of breaches of Mr. Henry's rights, significant media coverage of Mr. Henry's wrongful conviction, and ultimately a significant monetary award to Mr. Henry, paid by our government. Through all of this, the rights of the women he sexually assaulted were not considered They were not called upon or allowed to participate in the process.

The five plaintiffs in this case are now all women in their 60s or 70s who have lived remarkable lives notwithstanding the sexual assaults committed by Mr. Henry. They did not choose to be rape victims. That was forced upon them. They also did not choose to spend years of their lives, at this stage of their lives, litigating their sexual assaults from so many years ago. But, after Mr. Henry's civil damages trial and the public narrative of Mr. Henry as an innocent man grew, they felt they had no choice.

These five victims embarked on this journey in 2017, facing what were described in the media as "insurmountable hurdles." This required incredible strength and bravery. They did so not for themselves but because of their commitment to the truth.

They hope that the public narrative reflects the truth. That is a truth that they have always known, but one that is finally affirmed by the Court's judgment. 

They hope our legal system will ensure that when the rights of the offender are being considered – be it in a review of a historical conviction or a modern Jordan application – that the victims of the offence are given the support and the advice that they need in what are often the worst moments of one's life. Victims should not be left to fight for themselves.

They hope that this judgment will give strength to other victims to come forward, to speak up, and to pursue their own rights. It is not only the rights of the offender that matter. Victims' rights matter.

And they are grateful that, this many decades later, their voices have finally been heard.

SOURCE Murphy Battista LLP

For more information: Irina Kordic, [email protected]; Kevin Gourlay, [email protected]