Gregory Hendry

The accused, charged with aggravated sexual assault for failing to disclose his HIV-positive status to the complainant, brought an application under s. 276 of the Criminal Code to introduce evidence of the complainant's prior sexual activity.

The accused sought to cross-examine the complainant on prior inconsistent statements regarding his sexual practices and to introduce evidence of a pattern of risky sexual behaviour to argue the complainant would have consented even if he knew of the accused's HIV status.

The court allowed the cross-examination on the prior inconsistent statements, finding them highly relevant to credibility.

However, the court dismissed the application to introduce evidence of the complainant's pattern of risky sexual behaviour, finding its probative value did not outweigh the prejudicial effect and risk of discriminatory bias.

The accused was charged with theft over $5,000 arising from a series of cheques written to herself from a corporate account while employed as a manager and later shareholder.

The Crown alleged the accused lacked authority and concealed the payments.

The defence maintained the cheques were authorized and properly recorded as shareholder loans in the company’s books.

After applying the W.(D.) credibility framework, the court accepted the accused’s evidence, supported by a forensic accounting report showing the payments were transparently recorded and not concealed.

The court held the dispute was essentially civil in nature between shareholders and that the Crown failed to prove theft beyond a reasonable doubt.