The accused was charged with sexual assault, assault, and unlawful confinement arising from an incident involving the complainant.
At trial the complainant testified she could not recall the events but affirmed that her preliminary inquiry testimony was truthful.
The Crown sought to rely on the preliminary inquiry transcript after a voir dire establishing necessity and reliability.
The court found the complainant’s trial memory loss was deliberate and motivated by a desire to reconcile with the accused, and accepted the preliminary inquiry evidence as reliable.
The accused was convicted of assault and sexual assault but acquitted of unlawful confinement due to reasonable doubt on whether the complainant’s liberty had been restrained.