Former Victoria masseur found guilty on five counts of sexual assault - Oak Bay News

[Bailey Seymour]

Warning: this story contains graphic content about sexual assault.

After almost a month of deliberation, Justice Catherine Murray found a former Victoria masseur guilty on five counts of sexual assault.

On Friday, Dec. 13, the Supreme Court justice made the judgment following a 19-day trial in October and November where the judge heard testimony that detailed Ajesh Jacob, who went by Sam at the time, inappropriately touching clients between 2019 and 2021 at Big Feet, a Victoria reflexology studio on Fort Street.

The accused was originally charged on 11 counts of sexual assault, though two of the charges were stayed and he was found not guilty on a further four counts.

On one of the guilty counts, the victim, whose name is protected by a publication ban, said Jacob told her she had a "womanly body" during a massage before placing the massage sheet under her belly button, leaving her breasts exposed.

"He began massaging her chest. He then started massaging her breasts. He was using both hands at once. [The victim] described his motions as more touching than massaging," Murray said, adding that the victim was frozen in fear during the ordeal. "She said that as she wanted to get out of the situation. As [the victim] explained, 'I think I realized that what was happening was not right and I didn't know what would happen if it kept going.'"

The victim jumped out of the bed and wrapped herself in the sheet before going to the reception area, where Jacob said "he would like to take her out and asked for her phone number," according to the judge.

Other alleged victims said he grabbed or touched their inner thighs, buttocks, and vaginas during massages.

When Murray clarified her reasoning in front of the packed court room, she explained that some of the alleged victims' testimonies lacked credibility, reliability and proved identity of the accused.

"Credibility has to do with the witness's veracity, reliability with the accuracy of the witness's testimony," explained Murray. "Accuracy engages consideration of the witness's ability to accurately observe, recall, and recount events in issue. Any witness whose evidence on an issue is not credible cannot give reliable evidence on the same point. Credibility, on the other hand, is not a proxy for reliability. A credible witness may give unreliable evidence."

She did note that some of Jacob's testimony was contradictory, did not make sense, and was inconsistent with other evidence.

"Considering all of Mr. Jacob's evidence as a whole, I find that he says what he thinks will help him. Overall, given the inconsistencies and evidence that does not make sense, I have concerns regarding his credibility and the reliability of his evidence," she said.

In January, a sentencing date will be set for Jacob.