R. v. A.B.

R. v. A.B.

Although the graffiti and symbols were hateful and publicly displayed and targeted an identifiable family, the Crown did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had the subjective intent to willfully promote hatred or was willfully blind to that effect; therefore acquitted on s.319(2) but convicted of aggravated mischief under s.430(4) given the racist and intimidating nature of the vandalism.

Citation
2012 NSPC 31
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused (young Person): A.B.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal (charges Under Criminal Code S.319(2) and S.430(4)) / Trial — Judgment/decision Issued
Outcome
Acquitted on counts under s.319(2) (willful promotion of hatred); convicted on counts under s.430(4) (mischief aggravated by racist content)
Legal Topics
Willful Promotion of Hatred, Mischief (vandalism), Intent and Willful Blindness, Freedom of Expression Limits
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Hate Speech Law Property Offences Willful Promotion of Hatred Mischief (vandalism) Intent and Willful Blindness Freedom of Expression Limits

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

A.B.

Accused (young Person)

Procedural Posture

Criminal (charges Under Criminal Code S.319(2) and S.430(4)) / Trial — Judgment/decision Issued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the graffiti and symbols constituted willful promotion of hatred under s.319(2) Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether the Crown proved subjective intent or willful blindness to promote hatred beyond a reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether the acts constituted mischief aggravated by racist content under s.430(4)

Ratio Decidendi

Although the graffiti and symbols were hateful and publicly displayed and targeted an identifiable family, the Crown did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had the subjective intent to willfully promote hatred or was willfully blind to that effect; therefore acquitted on s.319(2) but convicted of aggravated mischief under s.430(4) given the racist and intimidating nature of the vandalism.

Court Disposition

Acquitted on counts under s.319(2) (willful promotion of hatred); convicted on counts under s.430(4) (mischief aggravated by racist content)

Orders

  • Not guilty verdict on s.319(2) charges
  • Guilty verdict on s.430(4) mischief offences, aggravated by racist and intimidating manner