Summary conviction appeal from convictions for sexual assault and sexual interference arising from an alleged touching during a private appointment with a 12-year-old complainant.
The appellant argued, among other things, that the trial judge misapprehended the timing and content of text messages that were central to the defence theory that the complainant had a motive to fabricate in order to avoid further treatment.
The appeal court held that the trial judge repeatedly and materially misstated that the complainant disclosed the sexual touching to her friend while still at the appointment, when the actual allegation was disclosed later while driving home.
Because that error was essential to the rejection of the motive-to-lie theory and therefore central to the conviction, the convictions were set aside and a new trial was ordered.
