A complainant's inability to recall peripheral details surrounding historical child sexual abuse does not render a guilty verdict unreasonable where the complainant can provide a telling account of the offending itself and the lack of detail is explained by youth and passage of time. The prosecution's failure to cross-examine the accused on peripheral matters does not render verdicts unreasonable where those matters were put to the complainant. For historical child sexual offences involving breach of parental trust, a sentence of 18 months imprisonment (reduced from 2-3 years for mitigating factors) is within range.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.