The appellant, Romaine McBean, appealed convictions for assault, uttering threats, and sexual assault.
The appellant argued that the trial judge erred by stating that the appellant compelled the complainant to engage in sexual touching by abusing a position of power and authority, claiming there was no basis for such a finding.
The Court of Appeal clarified that the trial judge's reasons did not hinge on the complainant's inability to consent due to a power imbalance, but rather on the complainant's subjective lack of consent stemming from fear induced by the appellant's actions, including preventing her from leaving, threatening her, and making demands for sexual activity.
The Court found no error in the trial judge's approach to consent and dismissed the appeal.
