N. Chugh

The accused was charged with three counts of sexual assault and one count of forcible confinement against his former common-law partner.

The Crown applied to admit the complainant's evidence on each sexual assault count as similar fact evidence for the others, which the court dismissed due to the similarities being merely generic.

Applying the W.D. framework, the court acquitted the accused of the sexual assault charges because, although his evidence had frailties, it could not be entirely rejected, leaving a reasonable doubt.

However, the court rejected the accused's evidence regarding the forcible confinement charge, accepted the complainant's evidence, and found the accused guilty on that count.

The accused stood trial on historical sexual offence allegations said to have occurred when the complainant was approximately seven years old during babysitting visits with a family member.

The court applied the W.D. framework and the governing approach to children's evidence, recognizing that peripheral inconsistencies about time and place may carry less significance when childhood events are recalled in adulthood.

However, major conflicts between the complainant's account and other evidence, particularly documentary evidence about where the accused lived during the relevant period and inconsistencies with other family witnesses, undermined the reliability of the identification and surrounding circumstances.

Although the court found the complainant credible and did not conclude she fabricated the allegations, the Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused was acquitted on all counts.