How has the trial judge assessed the credibility of the complainant in a sexual assault case?

It was at this point that the trial judge canvassed the Browne v. Dunn issue in 10 paragraphs, twice stating she was using the appellant’s breach of the rule to assess the weight of the appellant’s testimony. There can be no doubt that this error adversely impacted the appellant’s credibility as a witness. Thereafter, the trial judge catalogued, in a further 10 paragraphs, inconsistencies and other statements of the appellant that she found troubling or implausible. She then addressed inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony identified by counsel for the appellant, and found these to be peripheral and insignificant.