The defendant sought to introduce evidence of non-consensual prior sexual activity with the complainant, his aunt, to explain the nature of their relationship, his behaviour during the alleged incident, and his mental state at the time of the alleged sexual assault.
The court conducted a voir dire to determine whether the other sexual activity (OSA) evidence met the requirements of section 276 of the Criminal Code.
The defendant claimed the complainant had sexually assaulted him over a two to three-year period when he was a youth.
The court granted the application, finding the evidence sufficiently particularized, relevant to issues at trial, and having significant probative value that was not substantially outweighed by prejudicial effect.