The accused was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference relating to three historical incidents alleged by the complainant, who was a child at the time.
The court found the complainant's evidence regarding two incidents in her bedroom lacked sufficient reliability to prove identity beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in acquittals for those events.
However, the court accepted the complainant's evidence, corroborated by the accused's admissions to family members, regarding a third incident where the accused touched the complainant's vagina with his mouth.
The accused was found guilty of sexual interference and sexual assault for this incident, with the sexual assault charge stayed under the Kienapple principle.
