R. v. Jeffrey

R. v. Jeffrey

The judge found the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused did not act in lawful self-defence: although an unlawful assault occurred and the accused subjectively felt fear, he did not reasonably believe he could avoid grievous bodily harm only by using deadly force, and the repeated stabbing was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2009 BCSC 643
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Jamie Richard Jeffrey; Victim: Edward Sampson
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Guilty on both counts
Legal Topics
Aggravated Assault, Assault With a Weapon, Self Defence, Evidence and Credibility, Use of Force/proportionality
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Aggravated Assault Assault With a Weapon Self Defence Evidence and Credibility Use of Force/proportionality

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Jamie Richard Jeffrey

Accused

Edward Sampson

Victim

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was not acting in self-defence under s.34(2) Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether the force used was no more than necessary under s.37 Criminal Code (proportionality)
  3. 3 Assessment of credibility and relevance of accused's alleged mental/integrity issues without expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused did not act in lawful self-defence: although an unlawful assault occurred and the accused subjectively felt fear, he did not reasonably believe he could avoid grievous bodily harm only by using deadly force, and the repeated stabbing was excessive under s.37; therefore the accused is guilty of aggravated assault and assault with a weapon.

Court Disposition

Guilty on both counts

Orders

  • Convicted of aggravated assault contrary to s. 268(2) of the Criminal Code
  • Convicted of assault with a weapon contrary to s. 267(a) of the Criminal Code