Canadian court says deaf man, 34, accused of child sex offenses is free to rape and murder because he has never been taught to communicate and thus cannot fairly be tried

By LAUREN ACTON-TAYLOR, US NEWS REPORTER Published: 15:49, 9 July 2026 | Updated: 15:49, 9 July 2026 A deaf man who was never taught to communicate cannot be fairly tried in court over accusations of child sex offences because it would violate his rights, a Canadian court says.  Kendal Longclaws, 34, faced eight sexual offences after three complaints in 2021, but his inability to communicate spared him from trial and possible prosecution.  Longclaws, of the Ermineskin Cree Nation, south of Edmonton, grew up on an isolated farm. He was left unable to read, use a phone, understand a calendar or utter more than a few words. When he was accused of sexual crimes, including sexual interference and sexual assault, he was unaware of what was happening, the National Post reported.  Two of his alleged victims were said to have been attacked between 2012 and 2016, with the third in 2021. Some of Longclaws' alleged victims were children, according to the outlet.  Due to his inability to communicate and understand his charges, the courts in Alberta ruled that prosecution or even a mental fitness assessment would violate his charter rights.  In 2025, King's Bench Justice Debra Yungwirth halted the only attempt to give Longclaws a trial before it began, stating that the case could not be legally handled.  Yungwirth noted several reasons, including Longclaws need for an interpreter - but as he couldn't understand English, and spoke no actual language, it would be impossible to communicate to him and honor this Charter right, the Post reported.  Longclaws, of the Ermineskin Cree Nation, south of Edmonton, grew up on an isolated farm According to Canadian law, a person charged in a criminal context much be able to hear the case against them and have an opportunity to answer it.  Upon arguments that Longclaws should undergo a mental fitness assessment to stand trial, Yungwirth said that doing so would also breach the accused's right to liberty, according to the Post.  Longclaws' inability to communicate would make such an assessment of his cognitive function impossible, the Justice said. A mental fitness assessment would also ascertain if Longclaws would be placed into a mental hospital for a length of time determined by psychiatric authorities. King's Bench Justice Debra Yungwirth halted the only attempt to give Longclaws a trial before it began Yungwirth also noted that there appeared 'no evidence' that Longclaws suffered from a mental disorder.  'There is clear prejudice of integrity of the justice system that will be manifested, perpetuated and aggravated by the continuing with criminal proceedings against Mr Longclaws,' she wrote, according to the Post.  'I recognize that a stay of proceedings will mean that the Complainants are deprived of their day in court. Mr Longclaws is equally deprived of the opportunity to resolve the allegations against him, which is significant in his small community.  'While the result is unsatisfactory to all involved, there is simply no other remedy available.' Longclaws was thus legally freed from the allegations against him.  On Tuesday, however, the Alberta court of Appeal upheld the decision.  The Crown argued that 'language deprivation syndrome' would constitute for Longclaws to undergo a mental health assessment, but the court believed there to be a lack of evidence, the memorandum of judgement stated.  Kendal Longclaws, 34, faced eight sexual offences after three complaints in 2021, but his inability to communicate spared the deaf man from trial and possible prosecution. Pictured: the Alberta Court of Appeal The 'public interest in proceeding to a trial' in Longclaws case was also noted by the Crown, particularly in cases involving sexual violence against children.  According to the outlet, the case now lies in the hands of the Supreme Court of Canada and, unless overturned, Longclaws will continue to live a free man.  The Daily Mail reached out to the Alberta Court of Appeal for comment.