Digest: R v Pinacie-Littlechief, 2017 SKQB 392

• Date: December 22, 2017

Reported as: 2017 SKQB 392

Docket Number: CRM 190/16 JCR , QB17486

Court: Court of Queen's Bench

Date: 2017-12-22

Judges:

• Kalmakoff

Subjects:

• Criminal Law � Disclosure � First Party Records

Digest: The accused was charged with second degree murder. The victim was stabbed by the accused during an altercation. The accused intended to raise a defence under s. 34 of the Criminal Code that what she did was for the purpose of defending herself or another person from an assault by the victim and that her actions were reasonable in the circumstances. She requested certain disclosure from the Crown which it refused to provide on the grounds that the records were in the possession of the Regina Police Service and/or the RCMP relating to what the accused described as the victim�s character or propensity for violence and records relating to the character of a Crown witness, Henry Thorn. Thorn had been a close friend of the victim�s and had testified at the preliminary inquiry that he had not seen any violent conduct on the victim�s part. The accused argued that the records sought were first party disclosure and therefore subject to the disclosure standards established in R v Stinchcombe because they were highly relevant to the issues that would be at play in her trial and would be required by her in order to make full answer and defence. She had received disclosure of the criminal records of the victim and Thorn, but argued that proper disclosure in this case required that she receive any police occurrence reports underlying the convictions as well as occurrence reports pertaining to any incidents involving the two individuals where charges were stayed, withdrawn or not laid. With respect to the victim, those records were relevant and disclosable on a first party basis because they would be relevant to the issue of self-defence. With respect to Thorn, the records would be relevant because the credibility and reliability of his evidence would be a key issue at trial.
HELD: The court found that the records relating to the victim were third party records and if the accused wanted to pursue disclosure of them, she would have to make an O�Connor application. His criminal record did not include any conviction or incidents involving violence. The records relating to Thorn were found to be first party records and the court ordered the Crown to request and obtain occurrence reports on his criminal record including any charges...