Another  big issue seems to be the judge's final sentence: "Since the crown did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt the complainants lack of consent, I have no choice but to find the defendant not guilty".

      So this is a BIG deal.  The victim has to prove they DIDN"T consent, which 'in theory' kind of makes sense because its the clearest way of proving that the perpetrator didn't get consent, but in reality what it means is that women not only need to 'say no', they need to be able to PROVE that they 'said no'.   And thats a tough thing to do in ordinary cases, let alone once booze is involved, and is sure to mean women are even lies likely to report sexual crimes. Do we all need body cameras all the time now?