Brian Henry Dickson

The defendant, Ian Katumo, was tried on charges of sexual assault, forcible confinement, and theft.

The complainant alleged that Katumo and another individual engaged in non-consensual sexual activity, confined her, and took her cellular telephone.

DNA evidence confirmed sexual contact between the complainant, the defendant, and the other individual.

The court assessed the credibility and reliability of both the complainant and the defendant.

The defendant's testimony was rejected due to inconsistencies and reliance on legally impermissible reasoning regarding consent.

The complainant's testimony, despite minor inconsistencies regarding timeline, was found to be clear, consistent, and compelling on the central issue of lack of consent and physical restraint.

The court found the defendant guilty on all counts.

The Crown charged two defendants with aggravated assault of a family member who sustained extensive facial bruising, stitches, and two significant fractures to her orbital bone on December 2, 2017.

The complainant gave two irreconcilable accounts: initially reporting a violent attack by both defendants to medical staff and police, then recanting at trial and claiming she had tripped and fallen down the stairs.

The court admitted the complainant's prior police statement under the KGB doctrine and found it more credible than her trial testimony.

However, the court concluded that while the evidence was highly suspicious of guilt and probably showed the assault occurred, the absence of independent corroborating evidence combined with the complainant's demonstrated willingness to fabricate evidence and her motive to do so created a reasonable doubt.

Both defendants were acquitted.