Thank-you Don, MEB and Jeff for your replies.

As I mentioned, I just need enough information to cast some doubt that the
investigation to my complaint wasn't just a "cursory" observation done by the
investigator (who, by the way, is another doctor). Having received all the
material from the investigation, other than the investigator looking at the
doctor's notes on his computer, as well as looking to see what date it was
"created" on, I can find no evidence that questions or issues were raised
about software. I don't know what sort of software he had used in Windows
98, but the "electronic" file from Windows XP was written on a very
simplistic, basic format, similar to this:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-ca/te...33&av=Z SC000
I have asked that the College obtain for me information as to what he was
using for software, but they refuse to comply.

So far, I am able to show the College that the "created" date can be
manipulated simply by disconnecting the computer from the Internet, changing
the date and then saving a file to a CD. To demonstate this, I am providing
them with a CD with correspondence they have recently received from me, which
I have dated back to as far as 1982 and even some up to 2015. I believe this
to be important, as this is what determined that the doctor told the "truth"
as to why he rewrote my file.

This is not a "court" case but rather disciplinary action would be imposed
if he were found guilty of fraud (ie his license revoked). As such, I am
without benefit of a lawyer (although the doctor has one), and the appeal
will be presented by me in front of a College board panel of three (2
doctors, 1 layperson). If I were to win the appeal, then this would go
before a panel of the doctor's peers, where a lawyer from the College would
take over. So the onus is not on me to "prove" that he committed fraud, but
that the investigation didn't do a thorough investigation; thus the main
reason why I am seeking information about transferring files. If there is
the "possibility" that the doctor was lying about compatibility issues and if
the investigator didn't delve deep enough, hopefully this will provide me
with a strong argument for my appeal.

I thank-you all again for being so responsive to my inquiry. I hope I
didn't bore you with too much details.