In what circumstances will a defendant deny that he went outside into the yard with the mother of the child on the night of the alleged conception?

In Verebioff v. Moojelski it was denying that he went outside into the yard with the mother of the child on the night it is alleged the conception took place.

In Lloyd v. Ribalkin it was denying that he ever went out with the mother of the child and his accompanying protestation that he only knew her casually, seeing her only on the street occasionally.

The material nature of the denial is apparent in each instance and hence the different complexion to the proved opportunity of sexual intercourse by the false evidence, amounting in each case, as held by the relevant Court, to be sufficient corroboration of the mother’s story to support a filiation order (or of the complainant’s story to support a conviction in Rex v. Drew). That is to say, the mother’s evidence of the paternity of the child has, in this manner, been corroborated in a material particular implicating the alleged father.