The accused was charged with sexual assault.
The complainant alleged that the accused sexually assaulted her in a laundry room.
The accused denied the allegations.
The Crown presented the complainant's testimony, corroborating evidence from her supervisor, and forensic DNA evidence (accused's DNA in saliva on the complainant's bra).
The defence argued inadequate police investigation, a motive to fabricate, and contamination of DNA evidence.
The court rejected the defence's arguments, finding the complainant's testimony credible and reliable, particularly due to the corroborating DNA evidence.
The court found the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
