The accused was tried on charges of sexual assault, sexual interference, and invitation to sexual touching arising from an alleged incident at a childhood pool party.
The defence sought to call a memory expert to challenge the reliability of the complainant’s delayed and partially recovered recollection, but the court excluded that evidence under the Mohan framework because the proposed opinion was unnecessary and intruded on credibility assessment.
Applying the criminal standard and treating peripheral inconsistencies with caution in light of the complainant’s age at the time of the events, the court found the complainant credible and, more importantly, reliable on the core narrative.
The court rejected the suggestion that the memory had been implanted or contaminated by the complainant’s mother and entered convictions on all three counts.
