The appellant was convicted at trial of six counts of sex-related offences involving two young children.
The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial on counts involving one complainant but upheld the others.
The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, arguing the trial judge erred by considering evidence from other counts when assessing his credibility.
The Supreme Court held that while verdicts must be based on admissible evidence for each count, a trial judge may consider the totality of a witness's evidence when assessing credibility.
However, because the credibility findings were deeply intertwined and a new trial had already been ordered for some counts, the Court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial on the remaining counts as well.
