2 total
Conviction and sentence appeals for historical child sexual abuse dismissed; trial judge properly assessed expert psychiatric evidence.
The appellant appealed his convictions and sentence for historical child sexual abuse.
At trial, the defence called a psychiatrist to testify that the complainants' allegations were the result of false memory syndrome.
The trial judge accepted the expert's qualifications in psychiatry but ultimately found the complainants had a reliable core memory of the abuse.
On appeal, the appellant argued the trial judge erred in her treatment of the expert evidence and misapprehended evidence regarding his expressions of remorse.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's assessment of the expert evidence or the appellant's credibility.
The sentence appeal was also dismissed, with the court upholding the sentence of two years less a day.
Appeal from convictions for sexual assault and unlawful confinement dismissed; fresh evidence application rejected.
The appellant appealed his convictions for sexual assault and unlawful confinement.
He argued that the trial judge erred in refusing to order disclosure of the complainant's psychiatric records, allowing the Crown to call the treating psychiatrist in reply, and assessing the complainant's credibility.
The appellant also argued the verdicts were inconsistent because he was acquitted of sexual assault with a weapon.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the trial judge's assessment of the false memory defence or the complainant's evidence.
The Court also rejected the appellant's application to introduce fresh evidence, concluding it would not assist in preventing a miscarriage of justice.
