The accused was tried on historic sexual offence charges arising from allegations by his younger half-brother.
The case turned entirely on the complainant's credibility and reliability, including delayed and piecemeal disclosure, inconsistencies, and the treatment of historic allegations recalled from childhood.
Applying the governing principles for historic sexual abuse evidence, the court rejected a motive-to-fabricate theory, accepted that the complainant's memory frailties were consistent with trauma and the passage of time, and found a history of sexual misconduct proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The court was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that two specific incidents fell within the indictment period, acquitted on the invitation count, and convicted on counts 1, 2 and 5.
