Annapolis Valley man convicted of sexually assaulting three women

An Annapolis Valley man has been convicted on three of four charges of sexual assault he was facing involving several women over a number of years.

Justice Josh Arnold delivered his decision Wednesday afternoon in Kentville Supreme Court in the case of Jakob Mark Fardy. He also found Fardy guilty of assaulting one of the sexual assault victims. He acquitted Fardy of a charge of sexual assault against a fourth complainant, and of single counts of assault against two of the victims.

Fardy, originally from East Tremont but currently living in Hantsport, was also facing a fifth charge of sexual assault involving another woman, but Arnold delivered a directed verdict of not guilty earlier in the trial because the woman chose not to testify.

The trial started in Kentville last October and sat for eight days in the fall, five more days in March and two days in April.

Arnold delivered his verdict to the charges orally, but didn’t provide the details in court, instead providing Crown and defence lawyers with the 175-page written decision and giving them time to review it before reconvening court.

None of the complainants can be identified and are referred to as complainants 1 through 4 to protect their identities.

Several members of Fardy’s family were in the courtroom, as were friends and supporters of the four women who testified against him.

Allegations followed breakup

The allegations covered a four-year period between 2016 and 2020. All were dealt with in the same trial.

They came to light after Fardy and former girlfriend broke up. Fardy accessed Complainant 1’s social media and deleted various posts, which she later reposted with a message in which she said he had deleted her photos and called him her “psycho ex.” That led to several other women who previously didn’t know each other or Complainant 1 to contact her about their own experiences with him. They eventually went to police.

Complainant 1 said that near the end of their relationship, Fardy was drinking heavily one night, being belligerent and raped her. She said she didn’t want to have sex, but he said it was happening whether she wanted to or not.

Fardy stopped drinking after that until a couple of months later, at which point he and Complainant 1 got into an argument. He started packing his belongings to leave the home they were living in, and threw a book and another item toward her, striking her.

Arnold accepted the testimony of the victim and others and convicted Fardy of the sexual assault but said he did not believe he had the intention striking the woman with the thrown items – which she described as “light touches” – and acquitted him of an assault charge.

The incidents involving Complainant 2 happened over a three-week period three years before those of complainant 1, when she and Fardy were dating.

She testified that they were at a party and drinking when she helped break up a fight between two people. Fardy then came up to her and, she said, grabbed her by the side of her neck and dragged her about six feet while accusing her of talking to other men.

A couple of weeks later, she said, she they were having sex when he stopped and tried to force her to perform oral sex. She said she refused but he continued to try to physically force her for a couple of minutes until he angrily left the room. When he returned, she was on the phone asking a friend to come pick her up and was gesturing for him to be quiet. She said he grabbed her by both wrists and she lost her balance and fell, and he laid on top of her telling her she had to calm down before letting her up a couple minutes after.

Arnold accepted the woman’s testimony and said that Fardy “tailored his evidence in many instances during the trial to meet the Crown’s case.” 

He convicted him of assault for the incident at the party and sexual assault but acquitted him of assault for grabbing the woman by the wrists because that incident was encompassed with the sexual assault.

Other party incidents

Complainant 3 testified that she went to a party the year before the incidents involving Complainant 2. She said Fardy, was there, but she didn’t know him well. She said she recognized him and they had spoken a couple of times previously at other gatherings, but they didn’t speak that night. She said she stayed at the home and went to sleep in a room, and awoke to find Fardy behind her and either his fingers or penis in her vagina, at which time he left. She said she sent him a message the next day asking for him to explain himself and he apologized, telling her he “was really high and really horny.”

Fardy testified they had consensual sex, which the woman denied.

Arnold said Fardy’s overall testimony was tailored, as it was with the other allegations, and “his evidence is simply not credible.”

Complainant 4 had testified that she and Fardy had never communicated but were connected on social media when he messaged her and offered to take her to a party that she wanted to attend but for which she did not have a ride. She said she accepted the offer but didn’t consider it a date. She said Fardy told her he would bring alcohol when she said she didn’t have any.

She said she blacked out at some point during the party and woke up at Fardy’s house with him on top of her as they were having vaginal intercourse.

While the judge said Fardy’s testimony was again lacking in credibility, as it was in all the other allegations, he said there were also several inconsistencies in the complainant’s evidence that were serious enough that he could not say that the allegation had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Fardy remains free on bail and is scheduled to be back in court Nov. 10 for sentencing.