The accused was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, and invitation to sexual touching involving a young girl with disabilities.
The Crown relied on the complainant's video-taped statements, DNA evidence found on a used condom, and the accused's inculpatory statements to police.
The accused recanted his confession at trial, claiming it was false and induced by his nonverbal learning disability.
The court rejected the false confession claim, found the DNA evidence and confession corroborated the complainant's statements, and found the accused guilty of the sexual offences.
