During a sexual assault trial, the Crown sought to introduce evidence that the complainant applied under the Mandatory Blood Testing Act, 2006 for an order requiring the accused to provide a blood sample for communicable disease testing.
The court held that the application constituted a prior consistent statement intended to bolster the complainant’s credibility regarding the occurrence of sexual contact.
The court rejected the Crown’s argument that the evidence formed part of the narrative of events.
Because the accused had not raised allegations of recent fabrication or lack of recent complaint, the evidence was inadmissible at that stage of the trial.
The court noted the issue could be revisited if the defence later opened the door through cross-examination.
