R. v. Meyers

R. v. Meyers

The judge accepted the complainant as credible and reliable on the core elements of each alleged incident, treated prior uncharged misconduct evidence only as contextual narrative (not propensity), construed the text messages and photographs as contextual/corroborative and as rebuttal to fabrication rather than...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2025 BCSC 1191
Parties
Prosecution: Rex (Crown); Accused: Cameron Bruce Meyers; Complainant: Lara Gerard (formerly Lara Meyers)
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Verdict (conviction)
Outcome
Accused found guilty of Counts 1, 2 and 3 (assault and assault by choking/strangling)
Legal Topics
Assault, Strangulation/choking, Credibility Assessment, Electronic Evidence (texts/photos), Admissibility of Uncharged Misconduct
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Domestic/intimate Partner Violence Evidence Law Assault Strangulation/choking Credibility Assessment Electronic Evidence (texts/photos) Admissibility of Uncharged Misconduct

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex (Crown)

Prosecution

Cameron Bruce Meyers

Accused

Lara Gerard (formerly Lara Meyers)

Complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Verdict (conviction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown proved each element of assault beyond a reasonable doubt for incidents on Sept 16, 2021, Sept 21, 2021, and Oct 16, 2021
  2. 2 Assessment of credibility and reliability of the complainant and the accused under the W.(D.) test
  3. 3 Admissibility and permissible use of evidence of uncharged disreputable conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The judge accepted the complainant as credible and reliable on the core elements of each alleged incident, treated prior uncharged misconduct evidence only as contextual narrative (not propensity), construed the text messages and photographs as contextual/corroborative and as rebuttal to fabrication rather than admissions by the accused, applied the W.(D.) framework and found the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally applied non‑consensual force on Sept 16 and Sept 21, 2021, and applied force including choking/strangling on Oct 16, 2021.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty of Counts 1, 2 and 3 (assault and assault by choking/strangling)

Orders

  • Found guilty of Counts 1, 2 and 3 of the indictment