Jeffrey Fisher

The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault, arguing the trial judge misapprehended evidence, engaged in illogical reasoning, and relied on stereotypes regarding the lack of a prior relationship between the parties.

The majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge's credibility assessments and factual findings were grounded in the evidence and free from reversible error.

A dissenting judge would have allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, concluding the trial judge misapprehended the appellant's evidence and relied on unwarranted common-sense assumptions about sexual encounters between acquaintances.

The Crown applied to admit a video statement of a deceased complainant under the principled exception to the hearsay rule in a historical sexual assault case.

The court found the statement lacked procedural reliability as it was not under oath and the complainant was not warned about the consequences of lying.

Substantive reliability was also lacking due to the complainant's mental health issues, potential motive to fabricate, and implausible details.

The corroborative evidence from siblings and the accused was insufficient to overcome the hearsay dangers.

The application was dismissed.