R. v. G.B.B.

(Calgary, P.C. - Assault with a Weapon). GBB was charged with assault with a weapon arising out of incident that involved a bystander. In this case, GBB was exiting a parking lot on a busy street in the City of Calgary. A pedestrian was walking on the sidewalk, approaching the parking lot exit, where there were sightline obstructions. GBB pulled to the edge of driveway exit and did not see the pedestrian, who was standing at the passenger side. The pedestrian became aggressive, banging on the passenger side window and then walked behind the vehicle to the driver side. Notwithstanding GBB's initial apology, unpleasant words exchanged. The pedestrian became angry and most definitely, on the evidence, approached GBB's open driver side window. At this point, GBB and the pedestrian had different accounts.

GBB entered a plea of not guilty and set the case for trial. Early case resolution discussions failed.  

In the view of the defence, it was GBB who was attacked. The defence theory was that after GBB apologized a verbal exchange took placed that caused the pedestrian to become angry. The pedestrian then approached GBB's driver side. That made sense, because there was no other reason for the pedestrian to be at the driver side. The pedestrian stated that GBB grabbed on and drove out of the parking lot. The evidence was that the vehicle rolled for about 20 feet -- hardly a lengthy distance for a motor vehicle to travel. GBB's version was that the pedestrian grabbed on and that in the moment of trying to resist that assault, the foot came momentarily off the break peddle. In light of all of evidence, GBB's version made much more sense than the pedestrian, who claimed GBB intentionally dragged. The Crown agreed and "stayed" the charge.

Prosecutor's must often make difficult decisions. Nobody can crystal ball a case with perfection. Though in criminal law the judge is often tasked to decide.  In GBB's case, additional evidence came to light just prior to trial that the pedestrian had made a similar false complaint in the past. As a result of the totality of the circumstances, the Prosecutor exercised prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutorial ethics does not mandate simply letting courts decide.

David Chow is an experienced Calgary criminal lawyer who routinely defends cases of assault. Though early case resolution options are always pursued, sometimes a case must be scheduled for trial in order otherwise obtain the best outcome. It is not unusual for new evidence to arise prior to trial that can help the defence. David Chow's clients sometimes engage the services of private investigators.  For a free consultation with an experienced criminal defence lawyer in Alberta, consider calling David Chow.