R. v. Paul

R. v. Paul

The judge found an air of reality to the accused's self-defence claim based on credibility assessment and lack of decisive demonstrative evidence; this left the Crown with a reasonable doubt on both the assault and the breach of probation charges, requiring acquittal on both counts.

Citation
2011 NSPC 112
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Evelyn Patricia Paul
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Oral Decision (acquittal)
Outcome
Accused acquitted on both counts; charges dismissed
Legal Topics
Assault, Self Defence, Breach of Probation, Probation Orders, Evidence and Credibility, Mens Rea
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Assault Self Defence Breach of Probation Probation Orders Evidence and Credibility Mens Rea

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Evelyn Patricia Paul

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Oral Decision (acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused committed assault on September 19, 2010
  2. 2 Whether the accused validly raised a self-defence under s.34(1) of the Criminal Code
  3. 3 Whether the accused breached a probation condition to keep the peace and be of good behaviour

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found an air of reality to the accused's self-defence claim based on credibility assessment and lack of decisive demonstrative evidence; this left the Crown with a reasonable doubt on both the assault and the breach of probation charges, requiring acquittal on both counts.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted on both counts; charges dismissed

Orders

  • Assault charge dismissed
  • Breach of probation charge dismissed