LAW & ORDER, LOCAL NEWS

GRUMPY OLD MEN TAKE ARGUMENT TO FAR

SFF-88110 030

On June 1, 2013, at approximately 12:25 pm, Police responded to a stabbing that occurred in an apartment complex in the 200 block of Atlantic Ave.

Upon arrival officers learned that two (2) males, who were known to each other, became involved in an argument while in their building complex.  As the argument escalated, the sixty-nine (69) year old male produced a knife and stabbed the seventy-six (76) year old victim causing life threatening injuries.

The victim was transported to hospital and was subsequently upgraded to stable condition.

The suspect was identified as Brian Bales (69) and has been charged with attempt murder due to his alleged involvement in the incident.

Bales was detained at the Provincial Remand Center.

INSIDER COMMENTARY:

Convicting someone of Attempt Murder is no easy task.  Attempt Murder is often referred to as the most difficult charge in the Criminal Code of Canada to prove.

In order to convict a person of Attempt Murder the Crown must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, the accused had intent to kill, not simply intent to cause harm.  In the absence of verbal indicators of an intention to kill, these cases are often plea bargained down to a lesser offence.

WIKIBOOKS INTERPRETATIONS:

The mens rea required for attempted murder is that there must be a specific “intent to kill”, not simply an intention to harm with consequences that could have led to death. Nor is it enough that he knows his actions are likely to cause death or was reckless to the possible consequences. There must be subjective foresight of the consequences of the accused’s conduct.

The mens rea required for attempted murder is that there must be a specific “intent to kill”, not simply an intention to harm with consequences that could have led to death. Nor is it enough that he knows his actions are likely to cause death or was reckless to the possible consequences. There must be subjective foresight of the consequences of the accused’s conduct.

Life threatening wounds alone is not sufficient evidence of an intent to kill. There must be evidence from which the trier of fact may infer that the accused intended something more than the actual or natural consequence of his wounding act. However, some wounds provide evidence of intent to kill. For example, a shot is to the head may be evidence of intent to kill. It is a question of degree having regard to all of the circumstances.

The crown must prove a specific intent to kill at the time of the actions.  Anything less would amount to a violation of section 7 of the Charter.

The intent to kill is often established by way of utterances of the accused of their desire to cause death.

When deliberating on consent, a jury can be instructed to rely on the common sense inference that “a person usually knows what the predictable consequences of his or her actions are, and means to bring them about”.

Share your thoughts - we value your opinion!