Assaults Charges Back

What is an Assault?

Assault can range from physical contact involving to push to more serious forms of conduct resulting in injuries. Generally an assault occurs when a person intentionally applies direct or indirect force to another person without consent.

Common Types of Assault and Related Offences:
  • Domestic Assault
  • Assault Bodily Harm
  • Aggravated Assault
  • Threatening Death
  • Assault with a Weapon
  • Sexual Assault
    (Sexual Touching, Indecent Acts)

Defences to Assault:

Consent: For an assault to have occurred, the Crown must prove that the application of force by the accused person was done without the consent of the party to whom the force was applied. Consent may be given expressly or implied. Often, consent is implied and is generally determined from the surrounding circumstances of the offence.

Self -Defence: A person may be justified in using force or threatening force in certain circumstances to protect either themselves, family members or property. The rule permits the use of force if the force is reasonable depends on the facts of the case.

Mistaken Belief in Consent: If consent did not actually exist, the accused may still be able to argue that they honestly believed the other party had consented to the application of force. An honest but mistaken belief in consent will also afford a defence to an assault charge.

What are the Penalties for an Assault?

The consequences of being found guilty of an assault charge are significant. Upon a finding of guilt, one may receive a criminal record and be sentenced to a period of incarceration in jail. Alternatively, the court may impose a lesser sentence including probation with counselling or a fine.

We have the experience, resource and tools required to provide you with the most effective legal defence, often not resulting in a criminal record. It is important to remember that every allegation of theft, fraud or robbery is a fact specific inquiry. Consulting a lawyer will assist you with identifying potential defences to this type of allegation.

Assault Charges Ontario, Canada

Are you facing assault charges? You need an experienced defense attorney to help you fight your charges. Criminalcases Office is also a criminal law firm that serves Mississauga, Georgetown, Toronto, Oakville, Brampton, Ontario, Contact Bhangal & Virk Associates for consultation by our dedicated and experienced criminal defence lawyers.

Recent Success *

R. v. A.C. (2015)

Case - Our client was charged with criminal harassment and assault (x2) against his girlfriend. Our client maintained his innocence and we ultimately set a date for trial. The client had received two peace bonds in the past for similar types of offences. Based on his history and the complainant's views, the Crown initially refused to allow our client to enter into another peace bond.

Trial - At trial, we presented numerous photographic and documentary evidence to the Crown. This evidence cast serious doubt on the credibility and truthfulness of the complainant. The Crown agreed to withdraw the charges and our client entered into his third peace bond.

R. v. M.M. (2015)

Case - Our client was charged with assaulting her boyfriend by punching and scratching his face. He was charged also. She was also charged with assaulting him the previous year and received a peace bond.

Result - Through advocating the sympathetic circumstances of our client's situation, the Judge agreed to save her from the imposition of a criminal record, despite the injuries that were caused. The Judge imposed an absolute discharge.

R. v. S.S., A.S. & Y.S. (2015)

Case - Our clients were the father-in-law, mother-in-law and husband, charged with assaulting and threatening their daughter-in-law/wife. As a result of the charges, husband was not permitted to have any contact with his parents.

Result - Through strategic decisions, we first persuaded the Crown to allow our client's to have contact with each other. This was important as the husband was the caregiver for his aged parents. Secondly, we convinced the Crown to stay the charges against the father-in-law (the least serious allegations) in an effort to shorten what would have been a lengthy trial. Thirdly, during a Judicial Pre-trial shortly before the trial, we showed the Judge and the Crown that given the mother-in-law's serious medical condition and difficulty in moving around, it was unlikely she had poured a pot of hot oil on the complainant. This charge was withdrawn at the request of the Crown. Finally, on the eve of the trial, we presented the numerous inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence to the Crown, whom after consulting with their 'star' witness, agreed to withdraw the remaining charge against the husband.

R. v. S.H. (2014)

Case - Our client was charged with second degree murder, along with three other co-accused parties. A man was stabbed and killed during an intended robbery during a drug deal.

Result - We managed to convince a Superior Court and the Crown Attorney's office to agree to our client's release at a murder bail hearing. None of the others charged were released. Through extensive negotiations and pointing out the weaknesses in the Crown's case, our client's matter was resolved without having to go back and serve any more time in jail.

R. v. A.S.

Case - Our client was charged with having assaulted his wife by hitting her over the head repeatedly and causing some bruising to the arm area.

At trial - Our client's wife testified about how she was assaulted and described her injuries. Our client testified that the injuries were caused by him pushing his wife away, when she was assaulting him. He testified that he was attempting to push his wife away when she got angry that her in-laws were not talking to her properly

Result - The Judge felt that given the evidence of the wife and husband, they both appeared to be giving a credible version of events. Given this was a criminal case of assault, the Judge needed to be satisfied "beyond a reasonable doubt" that our client assaulted his wife. The Judge could not be satisfied of this. He felt that our client's version of events "could" have been true and as a result he must give him the benefit of the doubt and acquit him of the charges.

R. v. P.V.

Case - Our client and his wife were separated but still living under the same roof with their child. On a particular day, the wife started arguing with our client about laundry issues. Our client wanted to avoid a confrontation and simply tried to leave the house. His wife continued to follow him outside and continued to yell at him. When she couldn't get her way, she called the police and reported that he had pushed her.

At trial - Our client described for the court the tensions that existed in the house and the fact that he did not push his wife that day.

Result - The court found our client to be very credible and could not be satisfied that he actually pushed his wife. The charges were dismissed.

R. v. R.K.

Case - Our client was charged with assaulting his wife by pushing her and hitting her in the shoulder area.

At trial - Our client completed a counseling program recommended by our firm. This treatment showed insight into our clients anger issues and in turn, looked favourably upon him. His wife also assisted in saying some favourable things about him. As a result of his wife's input and our client's advanced treatment, the Crown exercised their discretion to drop the charges and simply have our client sign a peace bond. (Note: it is not common practice for the Crown to exercise this form of discretion; however, in the right case and right circumstances it does happen.

Result - Charges dropped and a peace bond signed by client.

R. v. S.P.

Case - Our client was charged with some allegations of serious bodily harm. His wife had some serious injuries as a result of our client repeatedly striking her in parts of her body with a stick. The injuries were consistent with being struck repeatedly.

Result - client entered a guilty plea to simple assault and received a sentence including probation and counseling. Our client was able to quickly go home and try to mend his relationship with his wife. He knew that he had done something wrong and was prepared to accept responsibility for his conduct.

R. v. S.B.

Case - Our client was sponsored from India by his wife. After living with her for two months in Brampton, she went to the police and alleged that he had sexually assaulted her and pushed her down the stairs. She had injuries to her chest area which appeared to be bite marks and an injury to her ankle and knees. We conducted a trial in Superior Court without a Jury.

Result - We attacked the wife's story by alleging that she was lying in an effort to get her husband deported from Canada. She had motive in doing so because she had previously sponsored a person from India and got divorced from him immediately after he arrived in Canada. Her second marriage (which was with our client) resulted in a very lengthy sponsorship process because Immigration was suspicious of her true intentions of marriage (marriage of convenience).

We discovered through face book that our client's now former wife (complainant) had gotten remarried to a person in Montreal (We learned that he was a Refugee). We suspected that she was having an affair with this person while married to our client. We suspected that she wanted our client deported so that Immigration would not suspect that this 3rd marriage was a marriage of convenience

We were able to have all charges dismissed by showing the complainant's motive to lie and her attempts to hide from the Court the immigration status of her 3rd husband and our client's very credible evidence that he was innocent

R. v. M.H.

Case - Our client was a 20 year old person who was introduced to a girl for a possible marriage proposal. The girl was 18 years of age and attending High School. It was alleged that he met her at the High School and forced her to have sex in the back of his car. The girl did not go to the police until 3 months later.

Result - We had cell phone records to show that the girl continued to have continued lengthy telephone conversations with our client after the incident of sex. They spoke on the phone for over one hour the day after the incident. She couldn't recall having these lengthy conversations (however, the telephone bills were clear evidence of the conversations). She admitted that it was our client who dumped her two weeks after having sex. She admitted that she was hurt when he dumped her. She said that at no time after the incident of sex did she confront our client and say that he had done something wrong and that she was mad at him.

It made no sense that if she had been raped by our client that she would have continued to talk to him afterwards and would have been hurt when she was dumped by him. The delay in reporting the incident was also problematic for the Crown. Further she was unable to explain how he forced her to have sex and how her tight jeans were removed in the back seat of the car. She came across as a person who was having our client charged because he had sex with her and promised her marriage, but didn't carry through with that promise.

After hearing the girls evidence, the Crown Attorney, withdrew the charges against our client.

* The above results are not necessary indicative of future results; and will vary according to the facts in individual cases