The accused was charged with sexual assault, forcible confinement, breach of undertaking, and criminal harassment.
The court first dismissed a section 11(b) Charter application, finding that the 22.5-month delay was reasonable due to the discrete event of the complainant's high-risk pregnancy.
During the trial, the court ruled that defence counsel's notes from a witness interview remained protected by litigation privilege because the witness did not use them to refresh her memory.
Ultimately, the court acquitted the accused of all charges, finding that the complainant's evidence, while credible, was unreliable due to significant inconsistencies and memory gaps caused by trauma, raising a reasonable doubt.
