The Queen v. W. (L.) 2017

Client was charged with sexual assault after a woman reported to police that she had awoken to her mother’s ex boyfriend on top of her in bed.  The woman’s story changed many times in the next month as the police interviewed her again for clarification on the details.  In her statements to police she also denied ever having had a sexual relationship with the client before.  Too bad for her, the client had text messages that strongly suggested that the two of them had “hooked up” before, to use the language of one of the texts.  Mr. van der Walle filed an application to cross examine the woman on her prior sexual conduct on the basis that it was relevant to her credibility as a whole.  After all, if she was going to lie to the police about the nature of her relationship with the client previously, what else could she be lying about?  The judge granted the application.  Months later and on the night before trial, no doubt apprehensive about the vigorous cross examination she could expect from Mr. van der Walle, the woman telephoned the Crown and told them she would not be attending for the trial.  The prosecutor, very much to his credit, called no evidence the next morning and the client was acquitted.  No trial necessary.