The accused were tried on historical sexual offence allegations involving a child family member and alleged participation by one accused in some incidents.
The case turned primarily on credibility and reliability, with the court applying the reasonable doubt framework and the principles in W. (D.) to conflicting testimony.
The court found aspects of the complainant's evidence exaggerated or inconsistent on material points, found one accused not fully truthful on some matters, and concluded that the evidentiary record as a whole left uncertainty about what evidence was true.
Because the Crown had not displaced reasonable doubt, both accused were acquitted.
