The accused was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference with a minor complainant during the summer of 2009.
The complainant alleged that the accused engaged in digital penetration on two occasions while she was staying at his home.
The accused denied the allegations, claiming the complainant was an unwelcome intruder whom he had banished from his home after discovering her in a sexual situation with his daughter.
The trial judge rejected the accused's evidence as internally inconsistent and incredible, finding that his professed behavior following the alleged sexual assault of his daughter was unreasonable and unbelievable.
The trial judge accepted the complainant's evidence as credible and reliable, finding her testimony concrete, guileless, and unexaggerated.
The trial judge found the accused guilty of both counts, with the sexual assault count conditionally stayed pursuant to the Kienapple principle, resulting in a conviction on sexual interference.
