**Sponsored by EasyDNS**
Move your domain or web hosting to EasyDNS and support Not On Record:
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord
Use promo code: **notonrecord**
In Episode 214 of *Not On Record*, criminal defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger and Diana Davison examine the important Ontario Court of Appeal decision R. v. C.P., 2026 ONCA 333 and discuss how mental illness can properly factor into assessing witness reliability and credibility in criminal trials.
The case involved allegations of sexual assault against a biological father and raised complex questions about a complainant who had a documented history of hallucinations, delusions, medication non-compliance, and street drug use during the period of the alleged offences. The Court of Appeal was asked to determine whether the trial judge improperly relied on myths and stereotypes about mental illness when acquitting the accused.
Joseph and Diana explain the critical legal distinction between credibility and reliability, why mental illness alone cannot be used to discount a witness’s evidence, and when case-specific evidence of hallucinations, delusions, panic attacks, psychiatric symptoms, or medication issues may legitimately become relevant at trial. They also discuss third-party psychiatric records applications, the evidentiary foundation required to raise mental health issues in court, and why judges must carefully avoid discriminatory reasoning while still assessing reliability based on evidence.
This episode provides valuable guidance for criminal lawyers, law students, and anyone interested in how Canadian courts balance fairness, mental health considerations, and the search for truth in the justice system.
### **Chapters**
**00:00** Introduction to R. v. C.P. (2026 ONCA 333)
**02:19** Mental illness, credibility, and reliability explained
**04:21** Hallucinations, delusions, medication, and street drug use
**07:10** Crown appeal and myths about mental illness
**10:13** Evidence supporting reliability concerns
**14:29** Accessing psychiatric and therapy records in criminal cases
**16:11** Why the Court of Appeal upheld the acquittal
**21:34** Lessons for lawyers handling mental health evidence
