In a pre-trial motion on sexual assault and forcible confinement charges involving two complainants, the Crown sought admission of cross-count similar fact evidence and the defence sought severance.
Applying the similar fact evidence framework, the court held that the allegations disclosed a distinctive pattern of opportunistic isolation and sexual assault that made coincidence objectively improbable.
The court found the evidence relevant to identity, consent, actus reus, and mens rea, with reduced prejudice concerns in a judge-alone trial.
The Crown's motion was allowed, the severance motion was dismissed, and the matter was directed to proceed as one trial.
