The accused applied under s. 591(3) of the Criminal Code to sever an indictment alleging sexual offences involving three complainants, arguing prejudice, lack of nexus, and differing intentions to testify.
The court held it was premature to determine the Crown's similar fact application at the severance stage, and considered only whether such an application was viable.
Applying the interests of justice framework from Last, the court found a sufficient nexus in the disclosure and possible collusion issues, little evidentiary complexity, no adequate evidentiary foundation for the accused's asserted selective intention to testify, and significant efficiency and timeliness concerns favouring a joint trial.
The court concluded the accused had not shown on a balance of probabilities that severance was clearly required.
