## [Request a Removal](/request-removal) IndividualWhich individual's profile are you submitting for review? Records for ReviewWhich entry on the individual's profile are you submitting for review? | Records for Review | |---| | Records for Review | | Statement Attachment In order to change or remove items from the Stinchcombe List, supporting documents will be required. Maximum 10 files. 10 MB limit. Allowed types: jpg jpeg png pdf. Contact Information Name Company Email Phone Address Address 2 City/Town State/Province Province/TerritoryAlbertaBritish ColumbiaManitobaNew BrunswickNewfoundland and LabradorNova ScotiaNorthwest TerritoriesNunavutOntarioPrince Edward IslandQuebecSaskatchewanYukon ZIP/Postal Code Accept: T&C I accept the [Terms & Conditions](/terms-conditions). Obstruction I have been advised of my rights with regard to *Obstruction of Justice*. Destruction I have been advised of my rights with regard to *Destruction of Evidence*. Use this form to request the correction, modification, restriction, consolidation, anonymization, archival treatment, or removal of information published by the Stinchcombe List. The Stinchcombe List is intended to preserve and organize potential disclosure, credibility, reliability, integrity, bias, and impeachment material concerning Canadian justice-system participants. At the same time, the platform recognizes that published information may later be corrected, overturned, clarified, duplicated, legally restricted, associated with the wrong person, or materially changed by subsequent proceedings. Every properly supported request will be reviewed. Submission of a request does not guarantee removal, immediate modification, or temporary suppression of the disputed information. ## Who May Submit a Request A request may be submitted by: - The individual identified in a Stinchcombe List profile; - A lawyer or authorized representative acting for that individual; - An employing or former employing organization; - A police service, prosecution service, court, tribunal, department, regulator, or government agency; - A person who submitted the original complaint or source material; - A person whose identity has been confused with the listed individual; - A family member or estate representative acting for a deceased person; - Another person possessing reliable evidence that published information is materially inaccurate, legally prohibited, duplicated, or associated with the wrong individual. A representative should identify the person or organization represented and explain the authority under which the request is made. ## Available Forms of Relief A requester may seek one or more of the following outcomes: - Correction of a factual error; - Correction of a name, title, rank, agency, jurisdiction, date, or employment history; - Addition of missing context; - Addition of an acquittal, dismissal, reversal, appeal result, or official disposition; - Reclassification of an allegation, complaint, investigation, finding, charge, or conviction; - Removal of duplicate information; - Consolidation of duplicate profiles; - Separation of records belonging to different individuals; - Removal of unlawfully published personal information; - Redaction of protected or irrelevant information; - Replacement of an inaccurate image; - Removal of a misidentified image; - Correction or removal of a broken or incorrectly attributed source; - Restriction of information subject to a publication ban, sealing order, or other legal prohibition; - Archival treatment of obsolete or superseded information; - Removal of a specific complaint, source, incident, or profile; - Temporary restriction while a serious identity or legal issue is reviewed; - Complete removal of the individual’s profile. State precisely what information is disputed and what action is requested. A general demand to “remove everything” may be difficult to assess without identifying the alleged errors or legal basis. ## Grounds That May Support Removal or Modification Removal or substantial modification may be appropriate where reliable evidence establishes: - Mistaken identity; - Conflation of two or more people; - Publication under the wrong name or profile; - A materially false factual statement; - A forged, fabricated, or deceptively altered source; - Incorrect attribution of conduct; - Incorrect identification of an employing organization; - A document or decision that does not concern the listed individual; - A complaint falsely represented as an official finding; - A charge falsely represented as a conviction; - A withdrawn or overturned finding presented as current; - Omission of an acquittal, dismissal, reversal, pardon, record suspension, or exculpatory ruling; - Duplicate publication; - Publication of information prohibited by law or court order; - Publication of protected personal information unrelated to the platform’s purpose; - A source that has been authoritatively shown to be fraudulent or materially inaccurate; - A material defect that cannot be adequately corrected through clarification, reclassification, or supplementation; - Lack of any reasonable connection between the published information and the Stinchcombe List’s disclosure or public-interest purpose. The requested remedy should be proportionate to the identified problem. A discrete factual error may require correction rather than removal of an entire profile. ## Grounds That Do Not Automatically Require Removal Removal is not automatic merely because: - The individual denies the allegation; - The individual considers the publication unfair; - A complaint remains unresolved; - An investigation did not result in discipline; - A complaint was classified as unsubstantiated; - No criminal charge was laid; - A charge was withdrawn or stayed; - No conviction resulted; - A civil proceeding ended through settlement; - A court declined to grant a requested remedy; - A professional regulator declined to investigate; - An employing organization closed its file; - The individual retired, resigned, transferred, or changed employment; - The information is embarrassing or professionally damaging; - The incident occurred many years ago; - The source was removed from another website; - An internal record was administratively expunged; - The individual was never formally placed on a government disclosure list; - The information has not yet been considered by a prosecutor or court; - The requester threatens litigation without identifying a specific factual or legal defect. These circumstances may still be relevant to the review. They do not, standing alone, resolve whether the information remains accurate, appropriately classified, or relevant to the platform’s purpose. ## Administrative Expungement and Disclosure Relevance Administrative expungement, record destruction, record sealing within an employment system, or removal from an internal disciplinary file does not necessarily eliminate the disclosure relevance of the underlying conduct. In *Edmonton (Police Service) v. McKee*, 2026 SCC 24, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the criminal-disclosure framework applied to police misconduct information even though the disciplinary record had been administratively expunged. The Court addressed misconduct having a realistic bearing on an investigator’s credibility and confirmed that provincial administrative recordkeeping rules could not displace constitutional disclosure requirements. Accordingly, a request based solely on administrative expungement should explain: - What was expunged; - Under which law, regulation, agreement, or policy; - Whether the underlying finding was overturned or merely removed from an employment record; - Whether the underlying conduct remains factually disputed; - Whether the information continues to have a realistic bearing on credibility, reliability, or investigative integrity; - Whether publication is legally prohibited; - Why correction, contextualization, or reclassification would be insufficient. The Stinchcombe List will distinguish between administrative record removal and substantive exoneration. ## Acquittals, Dismissals, Reversals, and Exonerating Records An acquittal, dismissal, reversal, withdrawal, or exculpatory ruling is material and should be submitted. The requester should provide: - The complete decision or official record; - The court, tribunal, regulator, or agency that issued it; - The file number; - The date; - The exact allegation, charge, complaint, or finding affected; - Whether the result was procedural or substantive; - Whether further proceedings remain pending; - Whether the decision has been appealed; - Whether any findings remain in force. Such a result may support: - Removal; - Reclassification; - Addition of a prominent disposition notice; - Correction of the procedural status; - Archival treatment; - Retention of the underlying historical record with an updated outcome. An acquittal does not necessarily establish that every underlying allegation was fabricated. Similarly, dismissal of a complaint for jurisdictional, procedural, timeliness, evidentiary, or screening reasons may not constitute an affirmative finding that the reported conduct did not occur. The disposition must be described accurately. ## Unsubstantiated Complaints A finding that a complaint was “unsubstantiated,” “not sustained,” “not proven,” “unfounded,” “dismissed,” or “closed” should be submitted with the complete decision and applicable definitions. These classifications do not have uniform meanings across Canadian institutions. A complaint may be closed because: - The conduct was found not to have occurred; - The evidence was insufficient; - The responsible person could not be identified; - The complaint was outside the body’s jurisdiction; - The filing deadline expired; - The complainant did not participate; - Relevant records were unavailable; - The official resigned or retired; - The conduct did not violate a specific internal policy; - The body exercised discretion not to investigate. The Stinchcombe List will examine the stated reason rather than relying solely on the disposition label. ## Age of Information The passage of time may be considered, but age alone does not determine whether information should be removed. The review may consider: - The seriousness of the conduct; - Whether the conduct involved dishonesty, evidence, disclosure, bias, retaliation, or abuse of authority; - Whether the individual remains in public service; - Whether the individual continues to testify, investigate, prosecute, adjudicate, regulate, or provide expert evidence; - Whether the information remains relevant to a pending or historical case; - Whether the conduct formed part of a pattern; - Whether the record remains publicly available; - Whether later information supports rehabilitation, correction, repetition, or exoneration; - Whether continued publication serves a legitimate legal or public-interest function. Older information may remain significant when it concerns credibility, evidentiary integrity, wrongful conviction, repeated misconduct, or unresolved institutional failure. ## Privacy and Personal Information A requester may seek removal or redaction of personal information that is unnecessary to identify the individual or explain the public-interest matter. Potentially removable or redactable information includes: - Home addresses; - Personal telephone numbers; - Private email addresses; - Financial account information; - Government identification numbers; - Unrelated medical information; - Information concerning minor children or family members; - Protected victim or witness information; - Information identifying a young person; - Information subject to a publication ban; - Personal details having no reasonable connection to the reported conduct. Professional information may remain relevant, including: - Name; - Public position; - Rank or title; - Employing organization; - Professional history; - Public disciplinary records; - Court findings; - Official statements; - Conduct performed under colour of office or within a public function. The requester should identify the exact information at issue and explain why its publication is unlawful, unnecessary, disproportionate, or unrelated to the platform’s purpose. ## Mistaken Identity Mistaken identity is a significant basis for correction or removal. Provide evidence such as: - Government-issued identification, with unnecessary numbers redacted; - Employment records; - Professional-registry records; - Official biographies; - Agency confirmation; - Court records; - Photographs; - Dates of birth where lawfully and safely supplied; - Employment dates; - Badge, regimental, licence, or employee numbers; - Geographic or assignment information; - Evidence identifying the person to whom the record actually belongs. The Stinchcombe List may temporarily restrict a profile where credible evidence presents a substantial risk that the wrong person has been identified. Do not submit more personal information than necessary. ## Incorrect or Misidentified Images A request concerning an image should identify: - The disputed image; - Why it does not depict the listed individual; - The actual identity of the person depicted, when known; - The source of the image; - A reliable comparison image; - The correct image, if available; - Any copyright, privacy, publication-ban, or legal restriction affecting the image. An image may be removed without removing the underlying profile. ## Source Retraction or Correction Where a newspaper, government agency, court, regulator, or other source has corrected or retracted material, provide: - The original publication; - The correction or retraction; - The date; - The publisher or issuing authority; - The exact statement corrected; - Whether the original content remains available; - Whether the correction concerns a minor detail or the foundation of the reported allegation. A source retraction may support correction or removal. It does not automatically require removal when independent sources continue to support the underlying information. ## Publication Bans, Sealing Orders, and Legal Restrictions A request based on a legal restriction should include: - The court or authority issuing the restriction; - The file number; - The date; - The complete order or authoritative record; - The statutory or common-law basis; - The precise information covered; - Whether the order remains in force; - Any expiration date; - Any exceptions; - The jurisdiction in which it applies. Do not submit protected information merely to demonstrate that it is protected. Redact the prohibited content where necessary. A general assertion that information is “confidential,” “private,” “sealed,” or “subject to a ban” is insufficient without enough information to identify and verify the restriction. ## Disputes Concerning Defamation A requester alleging defamation should identify: - The exact statement challenged; - Why the statement is factually false rather than merely unfavourable; - The evidence establishing falsity; - Whether the statement is presented as fact, allegation, opinion, or quotation; - Whether the source has been corrected or withdrawn; - Whether a court has ruled on the issue; - The specific correction or remedy requested. A bare allegation of defamation or a general legal threat does not establish that information is false. The review will focus on accuracy, attribution, classification, context, source reliability, and lawful publication. ## Required Information Provide as much of the following information as possible. ### Requester Information - Full name; - Relationship to the listed individual; - Organization, if applicable; - Contact email; - Contact telephone number, if necessary; - Authority to act for another person; - Preferred method of communication. ### Profile Information - Name of the listed individual; - Profile URL; - Employing organization; - Province or territory; - Position or title; - Specific complaint, incident, image, source, or statement at issue. ### Requested Action State whether you seek: - Correction; - Additional context; - Reclassification; - Redaction; - Image removal; - Source correction; - Consolidation; - Partial removal; - Complete removal; - Temporary restriction; - Another specified remedy. ### Basis for the Request Explain: - What information is inaccurate, restricted, duplicated, or misleading; - Why it is inaccurate or restricted; - What the correct information is; - What evidence supports the request; - Whether an official body has addressed the issue; - Whether any appeal, review, complaint, or proceeding remains pending; - Why a lesser correction would or would not resolve the concern. ## Supporting Documentation Attach or link the strongest available supporting records. Useful materials may include: - Court decisions; - Appeal decisions; - Acquittal records; - Dismissal or withdrawal records; - Disciplinary decisions; - Judicial-conduct decisions; - Professional-regulatory decisions; - Government correspondence; - Agency corrections; - Employment records; - Official biographies; - Identity documentation with unnecessary information redacted; - Publication bans or sealing orders; - Source corrections or retractions; - Settlement documents; - Pardons or record suspensions; - Proof of mistaken identity; - Proof that a document was forged or altered; - Evidence establishing that two profiles concern the same person; - Evidence establishing that one profile combines different people. Original and complete records are preferred. Identify any document that has been excerpted, edited, redacted, translated, summarized, or reconstructed. ## Request Review Process After receiving a request, the Stinchcombe List may: 1. Confirm receipt; 2. Verify the requester’s identity or authority; 3. Identify the exact information in dispute; 4. Review the submitted evidence; 5. Re-examine the original sources; 6. Seek additional public records; 7. Contact the original submitter; 8. Contact an employing agency, court, regulator, or other source; 9. Request clarification or additional documentation; 10. Temporarily restrict information where there is a substantial identity, safety, or legal concern; 11. Correct, reclassify, supplement, redact, consolidate, archive, retain, or remove information; 12. Record the disposition of the request. The review is administrative and editorial. It is not a court proceeding, appeal, arbitration, disciplinary hearing, or official disclosure determination. ## Evaluation Criteria The Stinchcombe List may consider: - Accuracy; - Completeness; - Identity verification; - Source reliability; - Number and independence of corroborating sources; - Procedural status; - Seriousness of the conduct; - Connection to credibility, reliability, bias, integrity, disclosure, or abuse of authority; - Continuing professional relevance; - Public-interest value; - Age of the information; - Subsequent correction or rehabilitation; - Acquittal, dismissal, reversal, pardon, or record suspension; - Legal restrictions; - Privacy interests; - Risk of material harm from inaccurate identification; - Whether correction or contextualization is sufficient; - Whether retention is necessary to preserve an accurate historical record. No single factor necessarily controls the outcome. ## Possible Outcomes A removal request may result in: - No change; - Correction of a factual detail; - Addition of a response; - Addition of an official disposition; - Reclassification of the material; - Redaction of personal information; - Removal or replacement of an image; - Removal of a specific source; - Consolidation of duplicate profiles; - Separation of conflated profiles; - Archival treatment; - Temporary restriction; - Partial removal; - Complete removal. The Stinchcombe List may retain a record of the request and its disposition even when public content is removed. ## Responses and Disputed Information Where a factual dispute cannot be conclusively resolved, the Stinchcombe List may retain the information while adding: - The requester’s denial; - A response statement; - Contrary evidence; - An official disposition; - A notation that the matter remains disputed; - A procedural-status update; - A link or reference to an appeal, review, or correction. The platform’s purpose is not served by presenting disputed allegations as established findings. It is also not served by deleting accurately attributed public records merely because they are disputed. ## Temporary Restrictions Temporary restriction may be considered when credible evidence suggests: - Mistaken identity; - An active publication ban; - Exposure of a protected person; - A forged source; - A substantial security concern; - An imminent and material risk arising from inaccurate personal information; - A serious legal defect requiring prompt review. Temporary restriction does not predict the final outcome. ## Repeated Requests A requester may submit a renewed request when new evidence becomes available. Repeated requests presenting no new facts, evidence, legal authority, or material change may be closed without a new substantive review. A prior denial does not prevent reconsideration following: - A new court decision; - An appeal result; - A disciplinary disposition; - A source retraction; - Proof of mistaken identity; - A new publication ban; - A material factual correction; - Another significant change in circumstances. ## No Guarantee of Search-Engine Removal Removal or modification by the Stinchcombe List does not guarantee immediate removal from: - Search-engine indexes; - Web archives; - Third-party databases; - Social-media posts; - Cached pages; - Screenshots; - Republished articles; - Court or government repositories. The Stinchcombe List controls only its own published content and systems. ## Preservation of Legal Records A removal request should not be used to destroy, conceal, or interfere with evidence relevant to a pending or foreseeable proceeding. The Stinchcombe List may preserve nonpublic administrative copies of: - Original submissions; - Source records; - Modification history; - Removal requests; - Verification records; - Publication history; - Communications concerning the profile. Retention may be necessary for legal compliance, audit integrity, dispute resolution, security, or accurate administration of the platform. ## Not an Official Expungement or Pardon Removal from the Stinchcombe List does not: - Expunge a government record; - Seal a court file; - erase a conviction; - Grant a pardon or record suspension; - reverse a disciplinary finding; - alter a prosecutor’s disclosure obligations; - prohibit lawful publication by another person; - bind a court, police service, prosecution service, regulator, or government agency. Similarly, refusal to remove information is not an official finding that the underlying allegation is true or legally disclosable in a particular case. ## Stinchcombe and McNeil Context The disclosure framework established in *R. v. Stinchcombe* requires the Crown to disclose relevant information subject to recognized exceptions. *R. v. McNeil* further addressed the treatment of police disciplinary and criminal-investigation records bearing upon the credibility of a principal Crown witness. The Stinchcombe List is not a Crown disclosure system and does not determine admissibility or disclosure in an individual case. Its removal review nevertheless considers whether information retains a reasonable connection to credibility, reliability, investigative integrity, or the fairness of justice-system proceedings. ## Requester Certification By submitting a removal request, the requester affirms that: - The request is made in good faith; - The requester has identified the disputed information accurately; - The submitted records are authentic to the best of the requester’s knowledge; - Supporting records have not been deceptively altered; - Material contrary information has not been intentionally concealed; - The requester has disclosed any material conflict of interest; - The requester has authority to act for another person where representation is claimed; - The request is not intended to obstruct a proceeding, conceal evidence, or violate a legal duty; - The requested remedy is described accurately; - The requester understands that submission does not guarantee removal. ## Before You Submit Confirm that you have: - Identified the correct profile; - Included the profile URL; - Identified each disputed statement, image, source, or incident; - Explained why the information is inaccurate, restricted, duplicated, or misleading; - Stated the exact remedy requested; - Attached or linked supporting evidence; - Included any official disposition; - Disclosed any pending appeal or review; - Distinguished administrative expungement from substantive exoneration; - Redacted unnecessary personal information; - Provided authority to act where submitting for another person; - Preserved copies of the original records. Submission places the request into the Stinchcombe List review process. It does not compel removal, commence a judicial proceeding, create an official appeal, or alter any independent legal or disclosure obligation.