The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault, arguing the trial judge misapprehended evidence and failed to address inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's credibility assessments or factual findings.
The court noted the trial judge properly applied the W.(D.) framework, appropriately addressed the complainant's post-offence conduct, and correctly rejected the appellant's explanations regarding DNA evidence.
