Following a judge-alone trial on historical sexual offence charges, the court convicted the accused of five counts relating to prolonged intrafamilial abuse of one complainant between childhood ages four and nine, and one count relating to a separate indecent assault on a second complainant.
The court applied the R. v. W. (D.) framework and held that credibility could not be treated as a simple contest between the complainants and the accused.
It found both complainants credible notwithstanding lengthy delay in disclosure, and held that delay in reporting childhood sexual abuse within a family context was understandable and not indicative of fabrication.
The court rejected the defence theories of collusion and confusion with abuse committed by another family member, and found the accused's evidence unrealistic, evasive, and self-serving.
