Self Defence, Scars and the Criminal Justice System
Self Defence, Scars and the Criminal Justice System
It is not uncommon for defence lawyers to defend people charged with serious offences. It is also not uncommon for defence lawyers in Calgary and throughout Canada to win cases.
By holding our justice system to account, defence lawyers serve an important role in our system of justice. Indeed, all justice system participants – when they do their job – serve an important function.
Police, who do their job well, are tasked with the important responsibility of investigating crime. A good police investigation does not assume one-side of the evidence to be true; rather, a competent police investigation is conducted in a manner that protects all parties, including the accused. When people are charged incorrectly – in the absence of a full, fair and reasonably thorough police investigation – there is a risk that our system of justice might fall into disrepute.
Prosecutors – who are quasi-Ministers of Justice – play a critical role in our criminal justice system. When their job is done well, the prosecutor acts as a check-and-balance to the police. They do so by closely scrutinizing evidence, with an eye that is fixed on more than merely advocating against the accused. To that end, Crown Prosecutors in Alberta have the power to stay charges, instruct further and better investigation and to resolve cases. If the Prosecutor has a reasonable prospect of conviction and there is a true public interest in prosecuting the case, the Crown has the responsibility to press the case firmly and fairly to conclusion, which might require a trial.
Judges are tasked with a myriad of important responsibilities, not the least of which is the power through the proper application of statutory and common law principles to determine guilt of the accused and if found guilty, to impose sentence.
To be sure, each party has many more responsibilities than I have generally spoken about here. Of course, witnesses also play an important role in our criminal justice system.
As onlookers absorbing media reporting about terrible crimes, it is important for all of us to keep in mind that our criminal justice system is guided by two important principles: the presumption of innocence and the requirement to prove the criminal case “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
In my nearly two-and-half decades of practice I have noticed a natural tension between Canada’s criminal law principles and the public’s perception of the treatment of person’s charged with crime.
How Can you Defend People like that?
As a Calgary based criminal lawyer who is routinely confronted by statements along the lines of “how can you defend that guy?”, I am keenly aware that there is often a disconnect between our criminal justice system and the public’s desire for accountability. Just today an acquaintance spoke to me about Shahbaz Ahmed – a 48-year man with a criminal history who lured his victim to a home in Edgemont on the pretext of showing a rental property.
The acquaintance – who shall remain unidentified – said to me, “how you can you lawyers defend people like that”? Additionally, this person expressed concerns that our justice system must have failed in the past because Mr. Ahmed was previously acquitted of crimes. Effectively, the acquaintance’s view was the since the criminal justice system must have failed in the past, it was responsible for exposing the victim in the present.
This is not necessarily true.
This inspired me to write this post.
The Past is not necessarily at fault for the Present
On reflection, it struck me that there are essentially two issues relating to Shahbaz Ahmed: (1) the recent terrible incident of luring and assault at the Edgemont home in Calgary and (2) his reported criminal past. It is the latter point that I will focus-on here.
As reported by the CBC,
“Last year, Ahmed faced two sets of criminal charges including two counts of assault with a weapon. Court records show he was acquitted on those charges, first in February and again in October. Ahmed was also acquitted on charges of possession of a weapon dangerous to the public, uttering threats and failing to comply with a release order”.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/edgemont-homicide-9.7044330
According to CTV news:
“Court records obtained by CTV News show Ahmed faced a list of charges in 2023, including assault with a weapon, possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose and threats causing bodily harm.
He was also found not guilty of a separate assault with a weapon charge stemming from 2022, but was convicted of mischief damage under $5,000”.
That Mr. Ahmed was “acquitted” is worth comment. I do so for the purpose of ensuring that our system of justice is put into the proper light.
I think it is very important for everyone to keep in mind that the presumption of innocence along with the criminal standard of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” exist not to protect the guilty, but to protect the innocent.
It is also important to remember that Mr. Ahmed may have, in the past, ‘actually’ been innocent.
To begin with, in those previous cases, it appears that Ahmed’s defence counsel did a good job. That defence lawyer likely navigated the evidence or lack thereof in a manner to expose weaknesses in the Prosecution’s case.
With respect to the prosecution, it is likely that the Crown was forced to prosecute Mr. Ahmed based on the evidence it had available. Remember, the fact that Mr. Ahmed was acquitted doesn’t mean the Crown failed to do its job. After all, proving a case “beyond a reasonable doubt” can be difficult (and it should be), but it can be extremely difficult if the Crown lacks evidence.
It is also probable that in Ahmed’s previous cases, the judge had to make a difficult decision. In criminal law, it strikes me that one of the hardest, most teeth gritting things to do as a judge is to acquit an accused in circumstances where the judge thinks that the accused is ‘probably’ guilt.
To protect the innocent, “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” requires proof based on admissible evidence to a standard much closer to absolute certainty than to mere proof on the balance of probabilities. Put another way, where proof on the balance of probabilities only requires a balance of 50% +.1, proof beyond a reasonable doubt demands proof of something closer to 100% than to 50% +.1. As you might imagine, meeting this standard through evidence can be onerous.
My point is to caution against thinking that our criminal justice system did wrong in the past simply because a man did wrong in the present. While many of us wish to assign blame, for the purpose of what happened at the Edgemont home, it is more likely than not the case that blame lies only at two feet (Mr. Ahmed’s).
Sincere Condolences
I think I speak for all defence lawyers (and the community at large) when I say that what happened to the victim who was attacked and her poor father who bore witness to the attack was nothing short of awful. We also cannot neglect to contemplate the impact of this event on family, friends and even the community.
As a defence lawyer, we are often confronted by terrible things and sometimes have to defend terrible people. While that’s our job, it doesn’t mean that we are in league with our clients or that we don’t feel for those who suffer. We are human and as such, I think I speak for Alberta’s entire criminal law community (including defence lawyers) that we extend our sympathies to the victim, her family and friends.
While many are applauding the victim’s actions in self-defence (including this Calgary criminal lawyer), I cannot help but picture the trauma that she experienced in the moment of that attack and the impact that the assault will likely have on her for a very long time. It’s not right that she is left to suffer with such scars.
It also saddens me to think of her poor father who witnessed the event; that’s a horror that no father should experience.
I applaud the swift decision by Calgary Police Service (CPS) investigators to declare that this was self-defence. While this may seem obvious, it is not unusual for death cases to result in unnecessarily prolonged investigations that by their very nature can traumatize and re-traumatize witnesses.
No person should have to experience what Shahbaz Ahmed reportedly wrought on these people.
I think the statement from the victim’s family, sent to CTV news, is worth reiterating in its entirety:
“On Friday, January 9th, our sweet baby girl was showing a man bigger, stronger and older than her, a unit for the 2nd time when he attacked and assaulted her unprovoked and premeditated. One of the reason why we are sharing this is because we hope no vulnerable innocent woman or man ever has to go through this living nightmare. If her story saves one life, that will be a [miracle.]
“Our family is not okay. We are shattered. We are walking around like we’re functioning, but it feels like something inside us broke and we can’t put it back together.
“Someone we love more than we can explain was brutally attacked and left fighting for her life. She is a sweet, kindhearted, beautiful, intelligence, sensitive old soul and would do anything to “help others. An avid volunteer in the community and loves people so deeply. She is the kind of person who makes other people feel safe. And now we’re trying to understand how something this evil could happen to someone like her.
“The first hit knocked her unconscious. And when she woke up, she didn’t wake up to safety. She woke up into a living nightmare, something outa a horror movie.
“She tried to escape again and again. She fought with everything in her just to breathe, while he was trying to strangle her to death and gripped his hands over her mouth so she couldn’t breathe. She tried so hard just to make it to the next second, just to stay alive.
“When we saw her, it didn’t feel real, as we broke down in tears the reality set in that we almost lost our sweet baby girl. Her face was so swollen and bruised we barely recognized her. Her body was bruised from head to toe. One eye was swollen completely shut and wouldn’t open for days. She suffered broken bones, scratches, the aftermath of a possible concussion and whiplash. Her hair was so matted from the struggle it took over 13 hours and professional help to untangle…. For the first couple days after the assault she was beaten so bad she was bed ridden and unable to move or function without her family by her side 24/7. All from trying to break free and run to safety.
“I keep thinking about her waking up and realizing she was still trapped in it. I keep thinking about the fear she must have felt. The helplessness. The shock. The moment she realized she might not get to come home and able to hug her loved ones and tell them she loved them one more time.
“She didn’t want to hurt anyone, she tried for so long to fight him off and escape. But when she was about to take her last breaths, she did what she had to do to survive and defend herself from this man taking her life. She escaped. She got to safety. She called the police. She did the impossible.
“And now she is left with injuries we can see and pain we can’t even name.
“We are heartbroken and furious. We are grieving who she was before this happened, because something was taken from her that day that she can never get back. And the most painful part is that she has to carry this for the rest of her life.
“Please hold her in your prayers and the strength to recover. Because right now we are trying to figure out how to live in a world where this could happen.
“If you’re someone who feels like you don’t have the will to keep going… look at her. She held on. She chose to live, even in the middle of absolute terror. And that’s something I will never stop being in awe of.
“Please any real estate agents and rentals managers or anyone out there be safe.”
Conclusion
For my part, this post – for what little it is worth, serves to extend my sympathies to the victim and her family.
From a legal perspective, it is also to remind everyone that while no person should have to experience the horror of what transpired in that Edgemont home, we should all be careful not to be unnecessarily critical of our justice system simply because Shahbaz Ahmed was acquitted in the past. That this man was acquitted in the past is not necessarily the result of a dysfunctional or incompetent justice system.
While our criminal justice system is a reactive system grounded in principles designed to ensure that only the truly guilty are punished, sometimes bad people slip through the cracks.
In the case of Shahbaz Ahmed, many have commented that he got what he deserved. One thing for sure, notwithstanding the outcome for Mr. Ahmed, the victim and her family did not get what they deserved.
While the act of self defence may be inspiring, the trauma exists no less.
These are my thoughts.
David Chow
Calgary Criminal Defence Lawyer
Update: January 16th, 2026
After writing this post, this Calgary criminal lawyer learned a little more about one of Shahbaz Ahmed's previous cases
https://globalnews.ca/news/11613876/self-defence-killing-shahbaz-ahmed/
On the surface, it appear that this ought to have been an open and shut case. However, what I wish to remind everyone is that the Crown ran a trial, a judge heard evidence and as such, there was likely a good reason for the acquittal. Please understand, the acquittal doesn't mean that Ahmed was actually innocence; rather, it only means that the judge was left with reasonable doubt.
Unfortunately, while I think I can again speak for all us in expressing a most heartfelt sympathy for the trauma and ordeal suffered by Mr. Henninger, there is just not enough context to conclude that Ahmed escaped punishment for that case because of a breakdown with our criminal justice system. Certainly there may have been a breakdown, but based on this information, I cannot conclude that there necessarily was.