R v Rouse

canada, canadian, case law, court opinion, canlii, skca, 2026skca91, 2026 skca 91 (canlii), 2026, skca, 91, (canlii), cacr3835; cacr3845, 2026, criminal and statutory offences, appeal, sexual offences, criminal code, ss. 276, 278.92, 278.93, 278.94, pre, trial evidentiary applications in sexual assault and sexual interference trial, scope of complainant participation and limits on defence use of admitted communications, miscarriage of justice alleged from trial unfairness, conviction appeal allowed, new trial ordered, evidence, cross, examination, prior inconsistent statement, letters admitted under criminal code, s. 278.92, whether defence could cross, examine on contents after crown tendered letters, whether restriction prevented putting prior inconsistent statement to complainant, full answer and defence, credibility central to jury trial, error of law found, conviction quashed, new trial ordered, procedure, trial management, complainant participation, criminal code, s. 278.94 hearing, whether complainant’s submissions exceeded limited standing and acted as “second prosecutor”, inflammatory materials, social science articles treated as evidence, failure to control submissions and reliance on them, trial unfairness and prejudice found, miscarriage of justice, new trial ordered, constitution, charter, s. 11(b), stay of proceedings, criminal code, s. 24(1), whether net delay exceeded jordan 30, month ceiling, allocation of defence delay and institutional delay, including vacated trial dates for judicial education, error in allocation found but not of legal consequence, stay application properly dismissed