The accused, a graduate student at York University, was charged with sexual assault under s. 271 of the Criminal Code.
The complainant, also a graduate student, alleged that after an evening of drinking at two bars with mutual friends, the accused sexually assaulted her at his apartment without her consent.
The accused's defence was that the sexual activity was consensual, characterizing the complainant as the sexual aggressor throughout the evening.
The trial judge rejected the accused's evidence as incredible and unbelievable, finding it inconsistent with the probabilities and the complainant's credible testimony.
The judge found that the accused, motivated by anger and a desire for control after the complainant's friend declined to join them for a threesome, took advantage of the intoxicated and vulnerable complainant.
The judge convicted the accused of sexual assault, emphasizing that consent requires affirmative communication and that the absence of physical resistance does not constitute consent.