Law360 Canada ( March 28, 2025, 3:14 PM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant Stump from his conviction for sexual interference on grounds that trial judge misapprehended evidence and applied improper standards of scrutiny when assessing complainant’s and appellant’s evidence. The complainant, then 8 years old, and her mother went for an overnight visit with AD at the residence of AD and the appellant. The complainant and her mother were sleeping on one of two couches on the main floor. While the mother slept, the complainant awoke and started playing video games and watching television. The complainant testified to a single assault that occurred at approximately 5 a.m. The appellant came down to the living room and asked the complainant to join him on the other couch where he proceeded to pull down her pants and rub her genitals over her underwear. The appellant also cupped his own genitals, the trial judge inferring from the complainant’s description that the appellant had an erection and was masturbating. Later that morning, the complainant reported the incident to her mother. The complainant provided a videotaped statement to police that same day. The statement was admitted into evidence, subject to certain portions that the trial judge ruled inadmissible. At trial, the complainant admitted in cross-examination to lying to the detective when she reported multiple assaults, and that AD had witnessed one of them and told her to run. The trial judge accepted the complainant’s evidence and did not believe the appellant....