The accused applied for production of third‑party counselling and treatment records relating to two complainants in a historical sexual assault prosecution.
The request was brought under the third‑party records regime in ss. 278.1–278.91 of the Criminal Code.
The court held that the accused failed to establish that the requested records were likely relevant to an issue at trial or to the competence of a witness.
The evidence relied upon consisted primarily of limited preliminary inquiry testimony and an affidavit largely based on information from defence counsel, which the court found deficient and overstated.
As the accused did not meet the threshold for stage‑one production, the application was dismissed.
