What is the case law on sexual assault and voyeurism?

The trial judge explained why the complainant’s evidence that the accused had sexually assaulted her convinced him beyond a reasonable doubt of the accused’s guilt on the charges of sexual assault and sexual interference. He determined that the only reasonable inference that he could draw from all the evidence was that the accused was also guilty of the charges of voyeurism, making child pornography and possessing child pornography. He concluded by entering a conditional stay with respect to the charge of sexual assault in accordance with Kienapple v. The Queen, 1974 CanLII 14 (SCC), [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729. Grounds of Appeal