R. v. Gilroy

R. v. Gilroy

The judge accepted the children’s testimony and the physical injuries, rejected the accused’s account and justification under s.43 as either inapplicable or grotesquely excessive, and concluded the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally assaulted the child causing bodily harm.

Citation
2015 NSPC 45
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Christopher Michael Gilroy
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Assault Causing Bodily Harm / Trial Oral Judgment (conviction)
Outcome
Convicted; conviction entered under s.267(b) of the Criminal Code
Legal Topics
Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Justification/section 43 (use of Force on Child), Child Witness Credibility, W.(d.) Credibility Assessment, Reasonable Doubt
Source Language
English

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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Christopher Michael Gilroy

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Assault Causing Bodily Harm / Trial Oral Judgment (conviction)

  1. 1 Did the accused intentionally cause bodily harm to N. D.?
  2. 2 Was the use of force justified under s.43 (parental correction)?
  3. 3 Are the child witnesses credible?

Ratio Decidendi

The judge accepted the children’s testimony and the physical injuries, rejected the accused’s account and justification under s.43 as either inapplicable or grotesquely excessive, and concluded the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally assaulted the child causing bodily harm.

Court Disposition

Convicted; conviction entered under s.267(b) of the Criminal Code

Orders

  • Conviction entered for assault causing bodily harm contrary to s.267(b) of the Criminal Code