I do. The question of burden of proof is interesting. I am stunned to hear Marie-Claude say that they will not process VAC disability claims without a conviction resultant from an alleged assault. I've seen a lot of criminal investigations in which a conviction did not result, but it's manifestly clear what happened.
In any case, the burden of proof for a conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt, and that's because there is going to be a penal consequence: somebody is going to lose their liberty, have a criminal record, or go to jail because of this. That is not an appropriate burden of proof to impose on somebody who is simply looking for treatment and benefits as a result of some sort of trauma or victimization.