2 total
Delayed disclosure did not undermine proof of intrafamilial sexual offences.
The accused was tried on charges of sexual assault, sexual interference, and incest arising from allegations by his child.
The defence attacked the complainant's credibility and reliability based on delayed and incremental disclosure, inconsistencies between two police statements, and an asserted motive to fabricate in order to escape a physically and emotionally abusive home.
Applying the W.(D.) framework and considering the law on delayed disclosure, the court rejected the accused's evidence as untruthful and internally inconsistent, accepted the complainant's account of vaginal intercourse, and found the Crown proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
A publication ban protected the complainant's identity.
Accused acquitted of sexual offences against a minor due to reasonable doubt from conflicting testimony.
The accused, an apartment building superintendent, was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, and forcible confinement against a 12-year-old resident.
The case rested on a credibility contest between the complainant, the accused, and an adult witness who was supervising the complainant at the time of the alleged incident.
Applying the W.(D.) framework, the court found that the adult witness's testimony, combined with the accused's denials, raised a reasonable doubt regarding the complainant's allegations.
The accused was acquitted of all charges.
