The appellant appealed his convictions for breaking and entering, kidnapping, and several sexual offences against a nine-year-old child, as well as his sentence.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge misapprehended the DNA evidence, which was not completely consistent with the appellant's guilt and contained exculpatory elements.
Consequently, the convictions for the sexual offences were set aside and a new trial was ordered.
The convictions for breaking and entering and kidnapping were upheld.
The sentence was reduced and the order delaying parole eligibility was set aside.
