Law360 Canada (April 12, 2024, 11:10 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from his conviction for sexual assault on grounds that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence on material issues, and that he erroneously treated the complainant as a child witness. The appellant and complainant were next door neighbours. There was no dispute that they had a consensual sexual relationship in 2018 and 2019 while the appellant was 56 and 57 years of age and the complainant was 16 and 17 years of age. The appellant said that the relationship ended on his terms, because he suspected that the complainant was using and selling drugs. Although the appellant acknowledged that he and the complainant engaged in multiple sexual acts throughout their relationship, he maintained that every incident was consensual in nature. He said he never pinned the complainant down or attempted to have anal sex with her. The appellant maintained that the trial judge materially misapprehended the appellant's evidence such that the verdict must be set aside. The respondent argued that while there were misapprehensions of evidence, they were not material to the result and the verdict should stand....