Gerald Barton

Case Summary

In 1968, a 14-year-old girl claimed that she had been sexually assaulted and impregnated by a biracial Black and Indigenous 18-year-old named Gerald Barton.1 On October 28, 1969, Barton pled guilty to having had sexual intercourse with a female between 14-16 years of age, contrary to s. 138(2) of the Criminal Code. This was a lesser charge than rape. Barton had been granted bail after being detained in the Digby, Nova Scotia jail for a day. His family had mortgaged their home to obtain the $500 bail.2 He was sentenced to one year of probation. Barton subsequently left Nova Scotia and worked as a manual labourer. For over 40 years, he carried the stigma and criminal record of a sexual offender.3

In 2011, Barton’s conviction was quashed by the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal in light of new evidence and with prosecutorial consent.4 The new evidence included DNA evidence that revealed that the father of the complainant’s baby was not Barton, but the complainant’s own brother. This evidence came to light in 2008, when the police became involved in a dispute in the complainant’s family. The complainant recanted her 1969 statements that Mr. Barton had sexually assaulted her.5 

The events leading up to Barton’s conviction are unclear, even for Barton himself. The RCMP notes indicated that Barton admitted to having sexual intercourse with the complainant but said it was consensual and he did not ejaculate.6 Barton asserted that he did not recall making any statement. Moreover, he did not recall having legal representation at his hearing. He thought the person who was his lawyer was actually the prosecutor but it appears that defence counsel may have represented him. Defence counsel may have acted for free because Barton’s family was too poor to afford a lawyer.7

After his wrongful conviction was overturned, Barton brought a civil suit against Nova Scotia and the RCMP for malicious prosecution, negligent investigation, and violations of his Charter rights. He was unsuccessful in claiming compensation at the Superior Court, which found no evidence of negligent or discriminatory investigation, nor any violation of his Charter rights that warranted compensation. The court found that the RCMP had not ignored exculpatory evidence because there was no exculpatory evidence in 1969. The RCMP had also inquired into the credibility of the complainant. Their notes read: “I patrolled to Jordantown, N.S., a Negro community, and interviewed the [M] girl. This girl appears to be of average intelligence, comes from a poor family and neighbourhood enquiries indicate she is of chaste character.”8

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal upheld this civil trial verdict in 2015, stating: “There is no guarantee in Canada that money will be paid to compensate a person who claims to have been wronged after an acquittal. This case demonstrates that fact.”9

Barton later asserted that an apology was unneeded at this point, as it would not serve to undo any of the damage that the wrongful conviction had caused over the past four decades.10 “I am not angry,” Barton told the National Post. “[But] it was a dirty trick they played on me. They threw me in jail, like I was nothing, and I don’t think that’s right.”11


[1] Blair Rhodes, “Gerald Barton, wrongly convicted of rape, appeals for compensation” (28 January 2015), CBC, <online: www.cbc.ca> [perma.cc/news/canada/nova-scotia/gerald-barton-wrongly-convicted-of-rape-appeals-for-compensation-1.2934564]; Barton v Nova Scotia (Attorney General), 2014 NSSC 192 at paras 8, 21 [2014 Barton v NS].
[2] Barton v Nova Scotia (Attorney General), 2015 NSCA 34 at para 25 [2015 Barton v NS]; 2014 Barton v NS, supra note 1 at para 10.
[3] 2014 Barton v NS, supra note 1 at paras 8-9, 16, 39, 81, 151, 159.
[4] Joe O’Connor, “'It was a dirty trick they played on me': 40 years later Nova Scotia man cleared of false rape charge” (7 December 2012), <online: www.nationalpost.com> [perma.cc/news/canada/it-was-a-dirty-trick-they-played-on-me-40-years-later-nova-scotia-man-cleared-of-false-rape-charge] [Man Cleared of False Rape Charge]; R v Barton, 2011 NSCA 12 [2011 R v Barton].
[5] Man Cleared of False Rape Charge, supra note 4.
[6] 2011 R v Barton, supra note 4 at para 37; Michael MacDonald, “Lead Crown testifies in Gerald Barton case” (9 April 2014), Mississauga News, <online: www.mississauga.com> [perma.cc/news-story/4456145-lead-crown-testifies-in-gerald-barton-case/] [MacDonald on Mississauga News].
[7] 2014 Barton v NS, supra note 1 at paras 31, 34-36, 89; 2015 Barton v NS, supra note 2 at paras 26, 32.
[8] 2015 Barton v NS, supra note 2 at paras 69, 149, 164; Amy Smith, “Man wrongly convicted of rape sues 43 years later” (25 April 2013), CBC News, <online: www.cbc.ca> [perma.cc/news/canada/nova-scotia/man-wrongly-convicted-of-rape-sues-43-years-later-1.1380185] [Man Wrongly Convicted of Rape Sues].
[9] 2015 Barton v NS, supra note 7 at para 2.
[10] Man Wrongly Convicted of Rape Sues, supra note 8.
[11] Man Cleared of False Rape Charge, supra note 4.

Case Details

  • Full name:

    Gerald Barton

  • Gender identity:

    Male

  • Race/ethnicity:

    Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit, Métis, Native American, etc.), Black (e.g. African, Haitian, Jamaican, Somali, etc.)

  • Age - at the time of conviction:

    19

  • Charges - specific offences:

    Sexual intercourse with a minor

  • Date of conviction:

    1969-10-28

  • Date wrongful conviction was overturned:

    2011-01-25

  • Sentence - total time served:

    00 years, 00 months, 01 days

  • Legal mechanism by which wrongful conviction was overturned:

    New evidence on first appeal

  • Status of alleged crime:

    Solved

  • Compensation Received?

    No

  • Guilty plea?

    Yes

  • Cause(s) of wrongful conviction:

    Barton was wrongfully convicted of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl whose parents refused to believe her when she initially identified her brother as the perpetrator. Decades later, Barton was acquitted after DNA evidence confirmed that the victim's brother was the father of her child.