The trial judge erred as a matter of law by admitting and relying on extrinsic misconduct evidence (alleged misuse of the complainant's credit cards) without identifying a live issue or weighing probative value against prejudicial effect, and by improperly enhancing the complainant's credibility based on the absence of contradictory third‑party testimony and implying the defence should have called that witness; those legal errors infected the verdict, warranting allowance of the appeal, setting aside of convictions and ordering of a new trial; the fresh evidence application was dismissed as u…