The Crown appealed the respondent's acquittal on the ground that the trial judge erred in refusing to permit it to lead similar act evidence.
The Court of Appeal found no error in principle or unreasonable exercise of discretion in the trial judge's ruling.
The trial judge applied the proper standard, considered the similar acts cumulatively, and reasonably concluded that the prejudicial effect of the proposed evidence outweighed its probative value.
The appeal was dismissed.
