Law360 Canada (May 24, 2024, 2:32 PM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from a judgment of the British Columbia Court of Appeal which upheld his conviction for sexual assault. The appellant was charged with assaulting his spouse, the complainant. According to a statement made to police by the complainant, she and the appellant had consensual intercourse on the evening of April 1, 2018, and the appellant sexually assaulted her the following morning, on April 2, 2018. The appellant filed a pre-trial application seeking an order to adduce evidence of sexual activity that occurred on April 1. The trial judge dismissed the application stating that the events of April 1 were not relevant to the issue of consent on April 2. He concluded that the evidence was sought to be adduced for the prohibited purpose of arguing that the complainant was more likely to have consented to the alleged sexual activity or that she was less worthy of belief. The appellant was found guilty. The majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It agreed with the trial judge’s decision that the appellant’s application did not satisfy the requirements for admissibility. It determined that the evidence was not shown to be relevant or integral to the defence and could potentially invite impermissible twin-myth reasoning. The appellant argued that the majority of the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial judge made no error in dismissing his application. The Crown filed a motion requesting a sealing order on all filed materials, that the appeal be held in camera, and any other order the Court might deemed necessary to protect information protected by ss. 276 and 278.93-278.95 of the Criminal Code....