Yes. What happened was that my police investigator made the mistake of showing me the two legal opinions that had been written, one by a Canadian Forces lawyer and one by a crown attorney within the province, and by doing so, waived solicitor-client privilege.
Anyway, in the crown attorney's letter that I was shown that day, the third paragraph read, and I paraphrase, “As then Officer Cadet Purdy herself states, the guy was on top of her and she could not get away, therefore there is no lack of consent.”
Basically, it was a fact-finding mission for me that day. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of not asking for a photocopy. So right now I've hired a private investigator to see what he can dig up.
What happened was, two days after that, I wrote the crown attorney naively and said, “I'd like a meeting with you, because I don't understand why my case has been closed. I've read the various Supreme Court decisions, I've read the Criminal Code, and in particular, I don't understand why you wrote...,” and I recited that sentence.
I got a letter back within a day or so, not even addressing what I had said. He recommended that I get support from my commanding officer. But when I went and was finally given access to those two letters, there was a different letter on my file.
But yes, that is what I read; that is what was there.