Following a judge-alone criminal trial, the accused was convicted of sexual assault and sexual interference involving a young child in the household.
The court applied the W.(D.) framework and held that, although the accused withstood cross-examination and merely denying the allegations could in many cases raise a reasonable doubt, the complainant's evidence contained internally specific details and was reinforced by corroborative post-disclosure evidence.
The court also considered prior similar fact ruling context but warned itself against propensity reasoning.
On the totality of the evidence, the Crown proved both offences beyond a reasonable doubt.
