A Carmacks man accused of having sex with a woman while she was unconscious has lost his bid to have a warrant for his blood thrown out of court.

Charles Leslie Anderson was charged with sexual assault following an incident in April 2008, when a woman accused him of having intercourse with her when she was passed out on her couch.

The RCMP were called after the woman went to the Carmacks nursing station because she had awakened without her trousers or underpants and suspected she had been assaulted.

"During the investigation that followed, a number of witnesses provided statements and a primary suspect came to light,” reads the request to obtain a DNA warrant.

"(The woman) eventually provided a statement which said that Anderson was the last person she remembered speaking to and seeing the morning of the complaint.”

Semen taken from the woman's body further implicated Anderson – it was a perfect match to his blood sample kept in the national DNA bank.

Anderson was ordered to give that sample in January 2009 after being convicted of sexually assaulting a little girl at a fish camp.

He was also convicted of two counts of sexual assault in 1991 and is under investigation for two others, according to police.

But Anderson's legal aid lawyer argued the warrant request "does not provide full and frank disclosure and contains inaccurate, misleading and false statements,” Justice Ron Veale summarized in his decision, released last Thursday.

The lawyer pointed to a number of problems with the request, starting with the statement that "other witnesses have stated that Anderson was observed placing (the woman) in his truck and driving to (her) house.”

RCMP Cpl. James Fenske wrote the request, but admitted in court last week that he never spoke to anyone who actually saw the two getting into Anderson's truck together.

The request also stated: "Anderson has failed to report to the National Sex Offender Registry as required by law.”

Although this was true in March 2009, the court heard, it was not true two months later, when Fenske filed the request.

Fenske also failed to mention the woman's uncertainty about what happened that night.

During the several conversations she had with police, the woman "indicated she wasn't sure she wanted to go through with the complaint and that there may have been a group of people that took advantage of her,” the judge noted in his decision.

But the corporal (who was a constable at the time of the investigation) told the court the woman gave a formal statement as soon as she was able to speak with a female officer.

"In her statement, the complainant said that she remembered sitting at home drinking a beer across the table from Anderson but that she blacked out after that. She was awakened by the phone in the morning with her pants and panties thrown on the floor beside her and bruises on her ribs, legs and arms.

"She thought Anderson dragged her from the kitchen table to the couch. In her statement, she said that she did not consent to anything and didn't know if he took advantage of her but she felt like he did.”

In reviewing the facts of the case, Veale noted that Fenske was not actually the lead investigator in the case, but had taken it over for a number of months, during which time he requested the DNA warrant.

"While I do not find any intent to defraud or mislead, there is no doubt that Constable Fenske did not provide full and frank disclosure to the authorizing judge,” Veale wrote.

He said the request was "prepared in a careless and slipshod manner,” and "a classic example of the problems that may arise when a (request) is prepared by an officer other than the primary investigating officer or the office that took the complainant's statement.”

In deciding whether the DNA warrant should be allowed if and when Anderson's case goes to trial, Veale removed all of the "errors and deficiencies” entered by Fenske.

He then reviewed what was left and found there was still sufficient evidence for a judge to approve the warrant, namely that the woman didn't remember having intercourse with Anderson and his semen was found inside of her.

Veale said that although he found the warrant request "extremely troubling with its falsehood and deficiencies,” it should be allowed based on a legal analysis.

Anderson has been held in the Whitehorse Correctional Centre since his arrest on this most recent charge.

He was refused bail last December, by Supreme Court Justice Erwin Stach because the people of Carmacks informed the court they did not want Anderson to return there, and there was no suitable place for him to live in Whitehorse.

No trial date has been set for this most recent matter.