The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault arising from a date with the complainant.
The trial judge found that while the sexual activity began consensually, the complainant withdrew consent when the appellant attempted to record her without permission, and the appellant subsequently forced vaginal intercourse.
On appeal, the appellant argued the trial judge misapplied the W.(D.) framework by fragmenting the evidence and provided insufficient reasons regarding credibility.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge properly assessed the totality of the evidence, correctly applied the burden of proof, and provided adequate reasons explaining why the complainant's evidence was accepted over the appellant's.
