The accused was tried on historical sexual assault allegations arising from an alleged priest-child relationship in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The court applied the approach to adult testimony about childhood events and held that inconsistencies on dates, times, and peripheral details did not undermine the complainant's credibility, particularly given the passage of time and the complainant's traumatic background.
Corroborative circumstances, including independent evidence of contact between the complainant and the accused and the contents of an assessment report recording the accused's admissions about sexual activity with underage males, supported the complainant's account.
One count was dismissed because the Crown did not prove the timeline beyond a reasonable doubt, but the second sexual assault count was proven and resulted in a conviction.