Appeal from sexual assault conviction. Issue as to whether the trial judge “struck an appropriate balance between allowing the appellant to present his defence … while also acknowledging his role to protect the complainant … from being subjected to … questions based upon discredited rape myths.”

Held: Appeal allowed, new trial.

Numerous interjections by trial judge into defence counsel’s crossexamination. Test being whether the right to make full answer and defence was breached by significant constraints imposed by the trial judge on cross examination: Lyttle 2004 SCC 5. “Mindful of the further imposition this result imposes upon all concerned including the complainant, my conclusion regarding the trial judge’s interventions having created the appearance of an unfair trial necessitates a new trial. An unfair trial is a miscarriage of justice.” Paperny, JA dissented.

K. Molle, K. Arial, Defence Counsel