The accused was charged with sexual assault alleged to have occurred in the mid‑1980s, criminal harassment in 2011, and two breaches of recognizance conditions.
The court found that the complainant’s evidence regarding a single instance of non‑consensual intercourse was undermined by inconsistencies, omissions in prior statements, and surrounding circumstances of a long‑term consensual relationship that continued for years thereafter.
The Crown also failed to prove the elements of criminal harassment, including repeated communications and a reasonable fear for safety, particularly given ongoing intermittent contact initiated by the complainant and her family.
Evidence relating to the alleged breaches of recognizance did not establish the required mens rea for the offences.
All charges were dismissed.
