Following a judge-alone trial on a sexual assault charge, the court found the complainant to be credible and reliable and rejected the accused's evidence that the intercourse was consensual.
Applying the W.D. framework and the Supreme Court's consent jurisprudence, the court held that the complainant did not subjectively consent and that her freezing, lack of resistance, and delayed complaint did not undermine that conclusion.
The court further held that the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent was unavailable because the complainant did not communicate consent and the accused failed to take reasonable steps to ascertain it, particularly in circumstances involving equivocal conduct and intoxication.
A finding of guilt was entered.
