In a judge-alone criminal trial arising from allegations made by an estranged spouse, the court considered counts of sexual assault, sexual assault causing bodily harm, unlawful confinement, and administering a noxious substance over the course of a multi-year marriage formed through an arranged marriage and immigration sponsorship process.
Applying the W.(D.) framework and a global assessment of credibility and reliability, the court found both parties gave plausible but sharply conflicting evidence, and identified inconsistencies and possible motive concerns in the complainant's account while finding the accused's evidence generally believable.
The court held the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the sexual activity was non-consensual, that bodily harm from anal sex was established, that the complainant had been forcibly confined, or that any alcohol or energy drink constituted a proven noxious substance on the evidence.
Acquittals were entered on all four counts.
