The accused was charged with sexual assault following an encounter with a 17-year-old complainant in a motel room.
The complainant alleged that she was intoxicated by alcohol and marijuana and was sexually assaulted despite expressing non-consent.
The accused maintained that the sexual activity was entirely consensual.
The court applied the W.(D.) framework to assess the conflicting testimony.
While the court found the accused's evidence to be incredible and incapable of raising a reasonable doubt, it also found significant reliability issues with the complainant's evidence, including memory gaps and inconsistencies.
Consequently, the court concluded that the Crown failed to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt and acquitted the accused.
