The appellant challenged convictions on the basis of inconsistencies in the evidence and the trial judge's credibility analysis, including a misplaced reference to corroboration.
The court held that the trial judge's treatment of the children's evidence and assessment of credibility were reasonable, and that the guilty verdicts were supported on the whole of the evidence.
On sentence, the court declined to address the validity of a probation term requiring attendance for psychiatric assessment in light of concessions made by both sides.
Leave to appeal conviction was granted but the conviction appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal sentence was denied.
