Ontario Appeal Court Orders New Trial in Strangulation Death of Cheryl VanHuizen
The Court of Appeal for Ontario has set aside Shawn Trowbridge’s acquittal and ordered a new manslaughter trial in the death of his common-law spouse, Cheryl VanHuizen. The court ruled that juries must be instructed on the legal limits of consent when serious injury results from strangulation.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario set aside the acquittal of Shawn Trowbridge on September 25 and ordered a new trial on a charge of manslaughter in connection with the death of his common-law spouse, Cheryl VanHuizen.
VanHuizen died with fractured neck cartilage in three places, bruises, abrasions, and multiple anal injuries, including a post-mortem rectal tear. Trowbridge was initially acquitted of murder by a jury after claiming her death resulted from consensual sexual choking during an argument.
During the original proceedings, Trowbridge testified that he had strangled VanHuizen many times before, twice rendering her unconscious. He also acknowledged knowing that strangulation could cause injury or death.
In its ruling, the Ontario court determined that consent becomes legally ineffective when serious injury results. However, the court required proof that the accused intended harm, knew of the risk, or was wilfully blind to it. The court explicitly rejected the approach taken in R v Barton by the Court of Appeal of Alberta, which held that consent cannot be given if the perpetrator ought to have known significant bodily harm could result. That Alberta case involved an 11-centimetre wound sustained by Cindy Gladue, whose death was linked to Bradley Barton.
Critics argue that current laws leave gaps in protecting women from strangulation. External pressure on the neck can deprive the brain of oxygen and cause serious injury within seconds using less force than opening a can of pop, often without leaving visible marks. Strangulation can impair speech, movement, and consciousness, preventing victims from signaling distress.
Legal reliance on proving the perpetrator's subjective appreciation of risk may disadvantage victims who are deceased or unable to testify. Furthermore, critics note that the normalization of sexual choking through pornography and popular culture obscures its lethal risks. These concerns regarding consent and strangulation have been raised by commentators such as Debra Soh, prompting scrutiny of whether Parliament should address the issue.