The appellant appealed his convictions for assault, sexual assault, forcible confinement, and related offences, as well as his six-year sentence.
He argued the trial judge erred in providing jury instructions in instalments, misdirecting on reasonable doubt, admitting expert and bad character evidence, and refusing a mistrial after inflammatory Crown remarks.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge's corrected instructions on reasonable doubt were sufficient, the evidence was properly admitted or cured by instructions, and the sentence was appropriate given the violent and degrading nature of the offences committed while on probation.
