The appellant, Seyenthan Sivakumaran, appealed his conviction for sexual assault by the Ontario Court of Justice.
The appeal argued that the trial judge misapprehended various aspects of the evidence and engaged in speculation, leading to an erroneous rejection of the appellant's account and acceptance of the complainant's.
The appellate court reviewed the trial judge's eight reasons for credibility findings, including the improbability of the appellant's account, the complainant's injuries, and the rejection of the defence theory of "concoction." The court found no errors in the trial judge's reasoning, concluding that the findings were entitled to significant deference and were supported by the evidence.
The appeal against conviction was dismissed.
