L. Ross

The accused was tried on five counts of sexual assault arising from alleged non-consensual vaginal and anal intercourse with his common law partner during their cohabitation.

Applying the W.D. framework, the court found the case turned on credibility and reliability in a classic conflicting-testimony record.

The court identified significant inconsistencies and omissions in the complainant's prior reporting, including an earlier sworn denial of sexual assault, silence in family-law and child-related proceedings, and contradictory collateral evidence from multiple defence witnesses.

The Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and all five counts were dismissed.

The accused was tried on an indictment alleging sexual touching and sexual assault of a child complainant over a multi-year period within a family home setting.

The court applied the W.D. framework and the child-witness credibility principles cautioning against the use of adult standards in assessing a young complainant's evidence.

The defence relied on denial, alleged inconsistencies, innocent explanations for some touching, and a theory of recent fabrication arising from family conflict.

The court rejected those positions, accepted the complainant's sequential disclosures and key incidents as reliable, and found the evidence proved both counts beyond a reasonable doubt.