The appellant appealed convictions for indecent assault and sexual assault arising from allegations by two complainants in a blended family context.
He argued the trial judge erred by refusing an offence-based challenge for cause, declining to sever counts involving different complainants, inadequately instructing the jury on the use of evidence across counts, and refusing a missing witness adverse inference instruction.
The court held that the challenge for cause issue was governed by existing authority, that severance was properly refused given the factual nexus surrounding disclosure during a custody dispute, that the charge sufficiently guarded against propensity reasoning, and that the trial judge properly exercised discretion on the missing witness issue.
The appeal from conviction was dismissed.