S. Balcharan

Following a judge-alone trial on multiple allegations of sexual assault and assault within a marriage, the court accepted the complainant’s evidence as detailed, clear, and largely uncontroverted.

The defence alleged fabrication, motive arising from related family litigation, and manipulation of audio recordings and text messages, but the court rejected those submissions.

Applying the authentication requirements for electronic documents under s. 31.1 of the Canada Evidence Act, the court held that discrepancies in metadata timestamps did not establish tampering and admitted the electronic records.

The court found the accused guilty on seven counts of sexual assault, one count of assault with a weapon, and one count of assault, and acquitted on one assault-with-a-weapon count involving a car tire.

The accused was tried on charges of sexual assault and attempting to obstruct justice arising from an alleged non-consensual sexual encounter and an interrupted 911 call.

The court rejected the accused’s evidence as contradictory, illogical, and implausible, but held that disbelief of the accused did not relieve the Crown of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under the W.(D.) framework.

Although the court accepted much of the complainant’s evidence and found it likely that a sexual assault occurred, it identified material inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and improbabilities going to the core events inside the apartment.

Those concerns left the court with a reasonable doubt on both counts, resulting in acquittals.