The accused was charged with sexual assault and touching for a sexual purpose after allegedly performing cunnilingus on a ten-year-old child who was sleeping over at his residence.
The Crown's case relied on the testimony of the child and DNA evidence showing the accused's amylase on the child's underwear.
The accused denied the allegations, claiming he was at work at the time and suggesting the DNA transfer was due to innocent contamination.
The court rejected the accused's evidence, accepted the child's testimony as corroborated by the DNA evidence, and found the accused guilty of both charges.
