Sarah Burton

The appellant, a registered massage therapist, appealed his conviction for sexual assault against a client.

He argued the trial judge provided insufficient reasons, misapprehended evidence, and erred in assessing credibility and the defence of mistaken belief in communicated consent.

The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding the trial judge improperly used the complainant's prior police statement and absence of embellishment to bolster her credibility, and failed to make necessary factual findings regarding the appellant's evidence and whether he took reasonable steps to ascertain consent.

A new trial was ordered.

The accused, Mr. Singh, was charged with possession of stolen property and dangerous driving.

The court considered two main issues: identification for the dangerous driving charge and knowledge/control for the possession charge.

The Crown had to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court found the identification evidence for dangerous driving unreliable due to its generic nature, the fleeting opportunity for observation, and the delay in the officer's note-taking, leading to an acquittal on that count.

For the possession charge, despite the doctrine of recent possession and the accused providing a false name, the court found no evidence that Mr. Singh had control over the stolen vehicle, as he was merely a passenger.

Consequently, Mr. Singh was acquitted on both counts.