M. Savage

The accused was charged with sexual assault and sexual exploitation of his daughter arising from repeated incidents of sexual touching occurring between 2008 and 2010 in the family home.

The case turned primarily on credibility between the complainant and the accused.

Applying the principles from R. v. W.(D.), the court assessed whether the accused’s testimony raised a reasonable doubt and whether the complainant’s evidence was reliable despite minor inconsistencies and youth at the time of the events.

The court found the accused’s evidence evasive and illogical and accepted the complainant’s account, which was corroborated in part by another household witness.

The Crown proved the offences beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused brought a Khelawon application seeking to admit hearsay evidence that, prior to execution of a search warrant, an officer told other officers that there was possibly a second armed male at the premises.

The officer who allegedly made the statement was seriously ill and unavailable to testify.

The defence argued the statement was necessary and reliable because it appeared in multiple officers’ notes and supported the theory that another person possessed the firearm found during the search.

The court held the statement did not meet the principled hearsay exception because reliability was not established and necessity was lacking where direct evidence from surveillance officers was available.

The application to admit the hearsay statement for the truth of its contents was denied.