Decision in ex-Nanaimo pastor, accused of sex interference, expected in December
Published 4:00 pm Friday, September 25, 2026
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready…
|
Note: The following deals with charges of sexual interference and assault and may not be for all readers.
The fate of a former Nanaimo youth pastor, accused of sex crimes against minors, is now in the hands of B.C. Supreme Court justice.
Ryan Richard James Morgan, 43, stands charged with counts of sexual interference of a person under 16 years old and sexual assault for incidents that took place in Bella Bella, Nanaimo and Courtenay in 2017 and 2020, involving two girls who were minors at the time – their names are protected under a publication ban.
Crown counsel contends that Morgan, while at Generations Church, inappropriately touched the girls and in some instances, it involved K (kinesiology) tape. Closing arguments were presented Wednesday-Thursday, Sept. 23-24 at B.C. Supreme Court in Nanaimo to Justice David Crerar, with a decision expected Dec. 14.
In her summation, Tania Holland, Crown counsel, discussed the culture that Morgan created at the church, as it is crucial in “assessing the evidence of the two complainants and the other witnesses.”
“He was this charismatic, well-spoken pastor who gained the trust of both [accusers], as well as many members of the church,” she said. “These two girls both had their own vulnerabilities, and he took advantage of them. He also fostered this atmosphere of young girls confiding in him. He was in a position of authority, and he used his status, trust, and influence to both manipulate and exploit both complainants, and ultimately sexually assaulted them.”
The prosecutor pointed to the evidence of a witness, who said Morgan held a lot of clout and who would control narratives.
“She said if someone stood up to him or [opposed] him, he’d get ahead,” Holland told the court. “He’d go to the boss, tell his version of things, say, ‘That person’s crazy,’ discredit them before they had a chance to talk, and this goes into the Crown’s theory of his control. He’s self-assured, really confident in his own abilities and character, (and) had a way with words … He had heard [the complainants’] personal stories, their issues, and this was the church culture that they lived in.”
One of the alleged incidents took place at the Nanaimo church and Holland said it was a building the accused knew well.
“Mr. Morgan knows every nook and cranny of that church, the busy areas, the quiet areas, where people wander through, and he knows where they go when they get back from a trip,” said Holland. “He knows where people are unloading. He’s been on many, many trips, and this is exactly the point. He knows where he could speak to [the complainant] alone … it all makes sense where the accused spoke with [her]. Also, there’s no evidence of cameras.
“In fact, [the complainant] stated there was something that looked really old that she thought was a camera and that there’s no evidence that anyone passes through that artery of church … dropping off supplies.”
Owen James, defence counsel, said Crown had not proven his client’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
On Monday, Sept. 21, James called a former worker who worked with Morgan at the church to the stand. She testified to never seeing the accused sexually touch minors.
If there ever was a time when leaders needed to be alone with a student, including Morgan, there was always a second person present in order to allow for “the privacy and protection of the student in the room,” she said, including medical situations.
When James asked how closely that policy was followed, she answered that they made fun of Morgan, because he was “such a stickler.”
“He was really intense about it, and he always said that he just wanted to make sure that nothing could ever happen, nothing could ever be seen as happening … So you’re not allowed alone in a room with a student, generally at all, but especially with students of the opposite sex,” she said. “He wouldn’t drive people home. He wouldn’t be in his office if there wasn’t anyone else in the building at all. And if there was, he would tell people beforehand. We weren’t allowed to either, generally speaking.”
Records were kept on “medical sheets” and detailed on an “anatomical diagram,” she testified, with two people signing the sheets. Further, people being treated would always be asked whether they were feeling comfortable or not whenever she had to touch someone’s body and she would always ask first.
Topical creams would be applied when someone had sore muscles, but never to anyone’s backside, in fact, the witness remembered Morgan stating, “how your lower back is a really sensitive area, so it feels like your butt crack is out, but it’s not.” She said as someone in the room, that was always a true statement.
In James’ closing argument, he pointed to the two alleged victims’ evidence. The testimony of the first complainant, he said, had a level of confidence and preparation that was striking and suggested “close to the air of rehearsal.”
“She seemed to have a Mr. Morgan voice; it was quite mocking,” James said. “That’s something that the court, I’m sure, made note of and should perhaps consider as perhaps indicative of [bias]. Ultimately … her reliability was clearly profoundly affected by the passage of time, as well as the infiltration of rumours about Mr. Morgan, which she heard from many members of Generations Church, that her credibility is impacted by internal, and external inconsistencies, as well as what I say is simply the profound unlikelihood of the narrative she told in court.”
James also suggested there could have been “witness tainting,” telling Crerar that the court must not only “scrutinize merely the contact the two complainants had with one another, but also consider the contact that they had with the broader community. Then the court, of course, also must remember: even if the two complainants denied extensive discussion with one another, it remains entirely possible those discussions happened.”
“The extent of the discussion between the two of them was something that was subject to questions on direct examination as well as cross examination. The complainants, I would suggest, both played down the amount of contact that they had with one another,” said James. “The court is, of course, left with that, but is left knowing that that simply might not be true.”
The trial was adjourned on June 19 and resumed on Tuesday, Sept. 22.
karl.yu@nanaimobulletin.com