R. v. A.H.H.

R. v. A.H.H.

The judge accepted expert medical evidence that the infant sustained a single, severe crush/impact skull injury inconsistent with the accidental scenarios offered by the accused; the accused gave multiple implausible and inconsistent accounts and delayed disclosure; considering the evidence as a whole beyond a reasonable doubt the accused intentionally applied brutal force to the child's head and thereby committed aggravated assault (s.268), failed to provide the necessaries of life (s.215(2)(a)), and failed to seek medical assistance/criminal negligence (s.221).

Citation
2016 NSSC 195
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: A.H.H.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Aggravated Assault, Failure to Provide Necessaries of Life, Criminal Negligence/failure to Seek Medical Assistance / Judge Alone Trial — Conviction (finding)
Outcome
Guilty on all counts
Legal Topics
Aggravated Assault, Failure to Provide Necessaries of Life (s.215), Criminal Negligence / Failure to Seek Medical Assistance (s.221), Circumstantial Evidence, Expert Medical Opinion, Credibility Assessment / W.(d.) Analysis, Browne V. Dunn Principle, Mens Rea for Assault
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Child Protection Evidence Law Forensic Medical Evidence Aggravated Assault Failure to Provide Necessaries of Life (s.215) Criminal Negligence / Failure to Seek Medical Assistance (s.221) Circumstantial Evidence +4 more

Case Brief

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

A.H.H.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Aggravated Assault, Failure to Provide Necessaries of Life, Criminal Negligence/failure to Seek Medical Assistance / Judge Alone Trial — Conviction (finding)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused intentionally inflicted injuries amounting to aggravated assault
  2. 2 Whether the accused failed to provide the necessaries of life to the child
  3. 3 Whether the accused criminally neglected the child by failing to seek medical assistance

Ratio Decidendi

The judge accepted expert medical evidence that the infant sustained a single, severe crush/impact skull injury inconsistent with the accidental scenarios offered by the accused; the accused gave multiple implausible and inconsistent accounts and delayed disclosure; considering the evidence as a whole beyond a reasonable doubt the accused intentionally applied brutal force to the child's head and thereby committed aggravated assault (s.268), failed to provide the necessaries of life (s.215(2)(a)), and failed to seek medical assistance/criminal negligence (s.221).

Court Disposition

Guilty on all counts

Orders

  • Count 1: Guilty — Aggravated Assault contrary to s.268 Criminal Code
  • Count 2: Guilty — Failure to provide the necessaries of life contrary to s.215(2)(a) Criminal Code