McLachlin had found that the denial of the mistake-of-age defence in the Criminal Code provision was justified under section 1 because it created a strong deterrent against having sexual intercourse with girls, even if they appear to have attained the statutory age. Wilson disagreed with this analysis. She argued that it ascribed an unrealistically high degree of legal sophistication to the average accused (paragraph 48).
McLachlin's decision to deny the mistake-of-age defense in the Criminal Code provision was justified under section 1 because it aimed to deter sexual activity with underage girls, even if they appeared to be adults. Wilson disagreed, arguing that this reasoning overestimated the legal understanding of the average accused (paragraph 48).