1 total
Only non-sexualized recovered-memory context was admissible under s. 276.
In a sexual assault prosecution, the court ruled on competing pre-trial evidentiary applications concerning prior sexual activity evidence and the complainant's attitudes toward sexual activity with the accused.
The defence sought to adduce evidence of prior sexual trauma to explain the complainant's reaction, her asserted belief in non-consent, and her later recovered memory; the Crown sought to lead evidence that the complainant had no romantic or sexual interest in the accused.
Applying the s. 276 framework, the court held that the defence could adduce only the fact of prior recovered memories, without identifying the sexual nature of the earlier trauma, and rejected broader use of the prior trauma evidence.
The court also excluded the Crown's proposed evidence as impermissible propensity reasoning on consent.
