Law360 Canada (December 8, 2022, 6:36 AM EST) -- Appeal by O.F. from his conviction of sexually assaulting his girlfriend’s 18-year-old daughter. He argued that the trial judge erred in determining that the evidence of prior sexual activity was inadmissible and in finding the complainant’s consent was vitiated. He sought to tender new evidence. The appellant and complainant’s mother were in a sexual relationship during two time periods. The sexual activity took place during the second relationship between the appellant and the complainant’s mother. It happened when the appellant and complainant went to a reserve alone. The complainant testified she was not okay with performing the sexual acts and she only acquiesced because she was scared. She described feeling uncomfortable throughout the sexual activity and wanting to go home. At the time of trial, the complainant was 21 years old. The appellant was aware the complainant had some special needs. The complainant was diagnosed with ADHD when she was around five years old and received the same diagnosis at the time of trial. She managed her ADHD symptoms with medication at various times in her life but was not on medication at the time the sexual activity took place. The trial judge found the complainant to be a credible and reliable witness. She accepted, on the totality of the evidence, that the complainant did not factually consent to the sexual activity. The appellant sought to introduce fresh evidence of third-party conversations online and social media postings appearing to originate from the complainant’s accounts....