The accused, charged with gang sexual assault and other offences, brought applications under s. 276 of the Criminal Code to adduce evidence of the complainant's prior sexual comments, gestures, and interest in a sex club to support their defence of honest but mistaken belief in communicated consent.
The court dismissed the application regarding the prior sexual comments and gestures, finding the evidence irrelevant and based on prohibited twin-myth reasoning.
The court permitted limited evidence regarding discussions about attending a sex club solely to provide context for a text message sent by one of the accused, with strict instructions against using it to infer consent.
Evidence of conversations immediately prior to the sexual encounters was ruled admissible.