In R v. Bernier (1998), what was noted about the accused's intent when touching patients?

In R v. Bernier, the court focused heavily on the accused's intent during the actions taken with the patients. The critical element addressed was that the accused did not act for sexual gratification. This perspective is significant, as it emphasizes the distinction between intent and effect in determining criminal liability. In this case, the court analyzed whether the acts constituted a criminal offense based on the mindset of the accused rather than on the nature of the act itself. By establishing that the accused's intent was not sexual in nature, the ruling suggested that the actions could be examined in a different light, raising questions about professional boundaries and the implications of such behavior within a clinical setting.

This assessment provides insight into how intent can influence the interpretation of actions in legal contexts, often shaping the outcomes of cases in criminal law. Therefore, the ruling contributed to understanding how actions can be seen through the lens of the accused's mindset, moving the conversation away from the prohibition of the act itself.