The accused was tried on five counts of sexual assault arising from alleged non-consensual vaginal and anal intercourse with his common law partner during their cohabitation.
Applying the W.D. framework, the court found the case turned on credibility and reliability in a classic conflicting-testimony record.
The court identified significant inconsistencies and omissions in the complainant's prior reporting, including an earlier sworn denial of sexual assault, silence in family-law and child-related proceedings, and contradictory collateral evidence from multiple defence witnesses.
The Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and all five counts were dismissed.
