The accused, a nightclub promoter, was charged with two counts of sexual assault involving two different complainants at different nightclubs in 2008.
The Crown applied to admit the evidence of each complainant as similar fact evidence across both counts, which the court dismissed due to insufficient similarity and prejudicial effect.
The court assessed the credibility and reliability of the witnesses, finding the accused's exculpatory evidence contrived and unreliable.
The court found the accused guilty on Count 1, accepting the first complainant's evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, the court acquitted the accused on Count 2, finding a reasonable doubt regarding the second complainant's identification of the accused due to her inability to recall his distinctive tattoos.
