The accused, K.G., was charged with three counts of sexual assault against his former common-law partner, M.H. The allegations included non-consensual vaginal intercourse while M.H. was in a medication-induced sleep, forced fellatio, forced anal penetration during consensual intercourse, and non-consensual sexual touching after separation.
The Crown sought to admit similar fact evidence.
The court dismissed the similar fact application, finding insufficient similarity between the alleged incidents.
The judge found significant credibility and reliability concerns with the complainant's evidence, including bias, dramatic shifts in demeanor, inconsistencies, and the impact of medication on her memory.
While the accused's denials were not entirely accepted, they could not be entirely rejected, leaving a reasonable doubt.
Consequently, K.G. was acquitted on all three counts.