COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) - and - DENIS GEORGE BOULET (Appellant)
BEFORE:
LASKIN, ROSENBERG and MOLDAVER JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
Mr. Boulet
In person
Howard Leibovich
For the respondent
HEARD:
November 27, 2001
On appeal from conviction by the Honourable Justice C. S. Dorval dated May 1, 2001
E N D O R S E M E N T
1Although there are some bizarre aspects to this case, the outcome hinged on the trial judge’s assessment of credibility. After properly instructing herself in accordance with the principles set forth in R. v W.(D.) (1991), 1991 93 (SCC), 63 C.C.C. (3d) 397 (S.C.C.), the trial judge gave cogent reasons for disbelieving the appellant and accepting the evidence of the complainant. Her findings of fact are supported by the evidence and in our view, she made no legal errors in her analysis.
2In particular, we reject the suggestion that the trial judge used the appellant’s after-the-fact conduct as positive evidence of guilt. To the contrary, we are satisfied that she used it, permissibly, as a factor in assessing the appellant’s overall credibility.
3In sum, we see no basis for interfering with the convictions. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Signed: “John Laskin J.A.”
“Marc Rosenberg J.A.”
“M.J. Moldaver J.A.”