The accused was charged with multiple historical sexual offences allegedly committed against his teenage stepson between ages 13 and 17.
The Crown’s case relied primarily on the complainant’s testimony describing numerous incidents of sexual contact across several residences over multiple years.
The court identified significant inconsistencies in the complainant’s accounts across his police statement, preliminary inquiry, and two trials, including contradictions regarding the nature of sexual acts, the circumstances of incidents, and physical characteristics of the accused.
A critical discrepancy arose where the complainant testified with certainty that the accused was circumcised, while uncontroverted evidence established that he was not.
Considering these credibility concerns and the absence of reliable corroboration, the court concluded that the Crown had not proven guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
