The accused was charged with sexually assaulting the complainant following a drug deal gone wrong.
Both the accused and the complainant were crack cocaine users and provided conflicting accounts of the events, with the accused denying the assault and claiming a panic attack prevented consensual sex.
The court applied the W.(D.) framework to assess credibility and found significant reliability issues with both principal witnesses' testimonies, including inconsistencies in the complainant's account and delayed disclosure.
Ultimately, the court concluded the evidence was sufficiently unreliable to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in an acquittal.
