Our client and his spouse were in an “open marriage”. Mr. L was bisexual and from time to time he was intimately involved with other males either alone or together with his wife. The complainant in this matter was a long standing friend of our client and his wife. The relationship between all three parties was strickly platonic for a number of years. However, the complainant alleged Mr. L coerced him into sexual activity on a number of occasions, at times also involving Mr. L’s spouse. The allegations were severe. The Crown’s evidence stated Mr. L would manipulate the much younger complainant, often orchestrating alcohol fueled get-togethers where the complainant was allegedly sexually assaulted while he was intoxicated. The allegations consisted of anal penetration, oral sex as well as manual masturbation. Mr. L could not agree with any of the allegations. He maintained he had a sexual relationship with the complainant but all sexual activity was fully consensual.
Mr. L could not agree with the allegations. The objective was to have the charges withdrawn or take the matter to trial.
When reviewing Crown’s evidence including the complainant’s statement, it was determined the allegations were largely contradictory deeming the complainant’s credibility poor. However, all initial discussions with the Crown were not successful. The Crown did not want to withdraw the charges and continued with the prosecution. The matter was set for trial.
After multiple discussions with the Crown, exposing the flaws in the complainant’s allegations the charges were withdrawn and the trial collapsed. Mr. L was very thankful that we did not give up on his matter but continued to defend him and represent his interests at a point in his life where he found himself facing very serious and grave allegations.