The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault with a weapon, which arose from an incident involving a bondage fantasy.
The defence argued the complainant had consented while in an alcohol-induced blackout.
On appeal, the appellant argued the Crown's closing address was inflammatory and misstated evidence, and that the trial judge erred in instructing the jury on the expert evidence regarding blackouts.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that while the Crown overstated the evidence in some instances, the trial judge's instructions adequately corrected the errors and prevented prejudice.
