In a sexual assault case, what is the striking similarity of evidence?

Furthermore it is, of course, apparent that in some cases, the application of a less stringent standard than the requirement of striking similarity, as was contemplated in R v. Arp, supra, could give rise to the admissibility of similar fact evidence, where otherwise it would not have been admissible. However, that is not the situation herein. Therefore, even in accord with the principles contained in R v. Handy, supra, I must conclude that there is insufficient similarity in the circumstances surrounding the prior discreditable conduct to support an inference that the complainant is probably telling the truth.