31 A court may conclude as a matter of law that there is no air of reality to a particular defence if the accused's case simply does not support it. In Osolin, supra, at p. 651, McLachlin J. concluded that the undisputed facts of the accused's case were, at the very least, consistent with wilful blindness and therefore did not admit of the defence of honest belief in consent (see also Sansregret v. The Queen, 1985 CanLII 79 (SCC),  1 S.C.R. 570). In her view, no person, reasonable or otherwise, could have honestly inferred consent from the circumstances, notwithstanding the fact that the complainant may have passively acquiesced at certain points. In such instances, the absence of an air of reality to the defence of honest mistake precludes it from being put to the jury.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.