Which of the following situations may demonstrate an honest mistaken belief in consent?

The situation involving the verification of age with valid documentation prior to consent demonstrates an honest mistaken belief in consent because it reflects a reasonable effort by the accused to ascertain whether consent was given. In Canadian law, for a mistake of fact to be honest and therefore a valid defense, it should stem from a reasonable foundation. By taking steps to verify age through valid documentation, the accused actively sought to ensure that consent was obtained lawfully. This action indicates a genuine belief that they were engaging in a consensual act, thereby satisfying the requirement for an honest mistaken belief in consent.

In comparison, the other scenarios lack similar reasonable bases. Intoxication may impair judgment and perception but does not necessarily constitute an honest belief in consent if it leads to misunderstandings about actions. Assuming consent based on the relationship without clear communication does not acknowledge the necessity for affirmative consent. Lastly, failing to inquire about circumstances leading to consent reflects a lack of due diligence and does not support a claim of an honest mistake, as it shows a disregard for the need to ensure consent was actually given.