Assaults

What is an Assault ?

Assault can range from physical contact involving to push to more serious forms of conduct resulting in injuries. Generally an assault occurs when a person intentionally applies direct or indirect force to another person without consent.

Common Types of Assault and Related Offences :

  • Domestic Assault
  • Assault causing Bodily Harm
  • Aggravated Assault
  • Threatening Death
  • Assault with a Weapon
  • Sexual Assault(Sexual Touching, Indecent Acts)

Defences to Assault :

Consent: For an assault to have occurred, the Crown must prove that the application of force by the accused person was done without the consent of the party to whom the force was applied. Consent may be given expressly or implied. Often, consent is implied and is generally determined from the surrounding circumstances of the offence.

Self -Defence: A person may be justified in using force or threatening force in certain circumstances to protect either themselves, family members or property. The rule permits the use of force - if the force is reasonable depends on the facts of the case.

Mistaken Belief in Consent: If consent did not actually exist, the accused may still be able to argue that they honestly believed the other party had consented to the application of force. An honest but mistaken belief in consent will also afford a defence to an assault charge.

What are the Penalties for an Assault ?

The consequences of being found guilty of an assault charge are significant. Upon a finding of guilt, one may receive a criminal record and be sentenced to a period in jail. Alternatively, the court may impose a lesser sentence including probation with counselling or a fine.

We have the experience, resources and tools required to provide you with the most effective legal defence, often not resulting in a criminal record. It is important to remember that every allegation of theft, fraud or robbery is a fact specific inquiry. Consulting a lawyer will assist you with identifying potential defences to this type of allegation.

Recent Victories *

R. vs. A.S.

Case Our client was alleged to have come home from a night of drinking. His wife got angry at him and accused him of having an affair. It's alleged that in the course of this argument, our client hit his wife on the face and pushed her to the ground.

Result The wife subsequently provided us with information to clarify what really happened. She clarified that she was pushing her husband out of the house, in the course of this altercation he pushed her away (to defend himself). The charges were WITHDRAWN by the Crown after our client took some anger management classes.

R. vs. S.S.

Case Our client sponsored his wife from India. Three months after coming to Canada, she alleged that our client assaulted her. It was our theory that she needed to stay married to our client for two years, in order to get her PR. She used our client to come into the country and alleged abuse to get out of the marriage without getting deported.

Result A trial was conducted. The judge had problems with the wife's testimony. She contradicted herself on a number of issues. She also had a motive to fabricate. Our client's testimony was clear and consistent. He denied ever hitting his wife and told the judge that he felt his wife was using him to come into the country. The Judge found our client NOT GUILTY of all charges.

R. vs. N.G.

Case Our client located his wife at a male co-worker's home. He allegedly became enraged and hit the co-worker and repeatedly hit his wife; he also was alleged to have destroyed property in the home.

Result We were able to obtain written input from the wife, with regards to what happened and the sudden and uncontrollable feelings felt by her husband. There were weaknesses in the Crown's case. The charges were WITHDRAWN after our client completed four hours of anger management and signed a 12 month PEACE BOND.

R. v. A.S.

Case Our client was charged with assaulting his wife by hitting her over the head repeatedly and causing some bruising to the arm area.

Trial Our client's wife testified about how she was assaulted and described her injuries. Our client testified that the injuries were caused by him pushing his wife away, when she was assaulting him. He testified that he was attempting to push his wife away when she got angry that her in-laws were not talking to her properly

Result The Judge felt that given the evidence of the wife and husband, they both appeared to be giving a credible version of events. Given this was a criminal case of assault, the Judge needed to be satisfied "beyond a reasonable doubt" that our client assaulted his wife. The Judge could not be satisfied of this. He felt that our client's version of events "could" have been true and as a result he must give him the benefit of the doubt and acquit him of the charges.

R. v. P.V.

Case Our client and his wife were separated but still living under the same roof with their child. On a particular day, the wife started arguing with our client about laundry issues. Our client wanted to avoid a confrontation and simply tried to leave the house. His wife continued to follow him outside and continued to yell at him. When she couldn't get her way, she called the police and reported that he had pushed her.

Trial Our client described for the court the tensions that existed in the house and the fact that he did not push his wife that day.

Result The court found our client to be very credible and could not be satisfied that he actually pushed his wife. The charges were dismissed.

R. v. R.K.

Case Our client was charged with assaulting his wife by pushing her and hitting her in the shoulder area.

Trial Our client completed a counseling program recommended by our firm. This treatment showed insight into our clients anger issues and in turn, looked favourably upon him. His wife also assisted in saying some favourable things about him. As a result of his wife's input and our client's advanced treatment, the Crown exercised their discretion to drop the charges and simply have our client sign a peace bond. (Note: it is not common practice for the Crown to exercise this form of discretion; however, in the right case and right circumstances it does happen.

Result Charges dropped and a peace bond signed by client.

R. v. S.P.

Case Our client was charged with some allegations of serious bodily harm. His wife had some serious injuries as a result of our client repeatedly striking her in parts of her body with a stick. The injuries were consistent with being struck repeatedly.

Result Client entered a guilty plea to simple assault and received a sentence including probation and counseling. Our client was able to quickly go home and try to mend his relationship with his wife. He knew that he had done something wrong and was prepared to accept responsibility for his conduct.

R. v. S.B.

Case Our client was sponsored from India by his wife. After living with her for two months in Brampton, she went to the police and alleged that he had sexually assaulted her and pushed her down the stairs. She had injuries to her chest area which appeared to be bite marks and an injury to her ankle and knees. We conducted a trial in Superior Court without a Jury.

Result We attacked the wife's story by alleging that she was lying in an effort to get her husband deported from Canada. She had motive in doing so because she had previously sponsored a person from India and got divorced from him immediately after he arrived in Canada. Her second marriage (which was with our client) resulted in a very lengthy sponsorship process because Immigration was suspicious of her true intentions of marriage (marriage of convenience).

We discovered through face book that our client's now former wife (complainant) had gotten remarried to a person in Montreal (We learned that he was a Refugee). We suspected that she was having an affair with this person while married to our client. We suspected that she wanted our client deported so that Immigration would not suspect that this 3rd marriage was a marriage of convenience

We were able to have all charges dismissed by showing the complainant's motive to lie and her attempts to hide from the Court the immigration status of her 3rd husband and our client's very credible evidence that he was innocent

* The above results are not necessary indicative of future results; and will vary according to the facts in individual cases
Get in Touch