The appellant appealed summary conviction findings of guilt for sexual assault, assault, criminal harassment, and breach offences arising from allegations by a former intimate partner.
He argued that the trial judge failed to consider corroborative defence evidence, failed to address material inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony, conflated the treatment of accused and non-accused witnesses, and applied uneven scrutiny to the evidence.
The appeal court held that the trial judge properly applied the governing credibility principles, including the W.(D.) framework, gave adequate reasons, and reasonably rejected the appellant's evidence as neither credible nor reliable.
The court found no material misapprehension of evidence, no reversible credibility error, and no unfairness in the scrutiny applied.
The appeal was dismissed.
