The accused, a family physician, was charged with sexual assault with a weapon (a needle) in relation to a patient who attended his clinic complaining of a headache and sinus infection.
The complainant alleged that during the administration of a Demerol injection, the accused unnecessarily lowered her clothing, inappropriately touched her, engaged in grinding motions against the examination table, discussed her sexual experiences, and ejaculated.
The accused maintained that the procedure was entirely professional and appropriate.
The trial judge found that while the complainant honestly perceived she had been sexually assaulted, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the touching was objectively sexual in nature.
The trial judge identified numerous material inconsistencies in the evidence of the complainant and her witnesses, including contradictions regarding the location of meetings, contents of a gift bag, the existence and content of recordings, and the presence of a diagram.
The trial judge also found credibility concerns with the accused's evidence.
Ultimately, the trial judge concluded that the Crown had not met its burden of proof and entered an acquittal.
