R. v. Maessen

R. v. Maessen

The therapist's identity is not disclosable by the Crown under the Stinchcombe disclosure regime because it is not in the Crown's possession or control; however the existence of therapy and the therapist's name are relevant at trial for a limited purpose (to test whether the complainant actually sought therapy as she publicly claimed), so the defendant may ask the complainant for the therapist's name at trial and the Crown will ask the complainant for it now; the court cannot compel a civilian complainant pre-trial to disclose the name under s.278.4(2).

Citation
2020 NSSC 80
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Marcel C.W. Maessen
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Assault / Pre Trial Voir Dire (s.278.3 Disclosure Application); Judge Alone Trial; Preliminary Inquiry Waived
Outcome
Court ruled that the therapist's identity is not subject to Crown disclosure under Stinchcombe because it is not in Crown possession or control, but the therapist's name is relevant at trial to verify the complainant's assertion of attending therapy; the Crown will ask the complainant for the therapist's name; the...
Legal Topics
Section 278.3 Application, Third Party Records, Therapist Records, Relevance, Crown Disclosure Obligations (stinchcombe/mc Neil)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Disclosure Sexual Offences Section 278.3 Application Third Party Records Therapist Records Relevance +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Marcel C.W. Maessen

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault / Pre Trial Voir Dire (s.278.3 Disclosure Application); Judge Alone Trial; Preliminary Inquiry Waived

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown must disclose the identity of the complainant's therapist
  2. 2 Whether the therapist's identity is within the Crown's possession or control for Stinchcombe disclosure
  3. 3 Whether there is sufficient foundation to meet the Stage One "likely relevant" test for a s.278.3 application

Ratio Decidendi

The therapist's identity is not disclosable by the Crown under the Stinchcombe disclosure regime because it is not in the Crown's possession or control; however the existence of therapy and the therapist's name are relevant at trial for a limited purpose (to test whether the complainant actually sought therapy as she publicly claimed), so the defendant may ask the complainant for the therapist's name at trial and the Crown will ask the complainant for it now; the court cannot compel a civilian complainant pre-trial to disclose the name under s.278.4(2).

Court Disposition

Court ruled that the therapist's identity is not subject to Crown disclosure under Stinchcombe because it is not in Crown possession or control, but the therapist's name is relevant at trial to verify the complainant's assertion of attending therapy; the Crown will ask the complainant for the therapist's name; the...

Orders

  • Defendant is permitted at trial to ask the complainant the name of her therapist for the limited purpose of testing whether she attended therapy as claimed on Facebook
  • Crown to ask the complainant for the name of her therapist following the court's ruling