The appellant, a massage therapist, appealed his conviction for sexual assault against a client.
He argued the trial judge erred by not considering the defence of accident, by drawing a negative credibility inference from his failure to ask about the allegations when confronted by the complainant's husband, and by dismissing the husband's evidence as irrelevant to the extortion theory.
The Summary Conviction Appeal Court dismissed the appeal, finding no air of reality to the defence of accident, that the credibility findings were reasonable, and that the trial judge properly considered and rejected the extortion theory.
