R. v. Pratt (H.O.), (2012) 407 Sask.R. 202 (QB)

• Judge: Whitmore, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: November 16, 2012
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2012), 407 Sask.R. 202 (QB);2012 SKQB 472

R. v. Pratt (H.O.) (2012), 407 Sask.R. 202 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2012] Sask.R. TBEd. DE.020

Her Majesty the Queen v. Howard Orville Pratt

(2010 CRIM No. 724; 2012 SKQB 472)

Indexed As: R. v. Pratt (H.O.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Wynyard

Whitmore, J.

November 16, 2012.

Summary:

The accused was charged with two counts of uttering threats (Criminal Code, s. 264.1(1)(a)) and two counts of assault with a weapon (s. 267(a)).

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench acquitted the accused on all charges.

Criminal Law - Topic 239

General principles - Statutory defences or exceptions - Self-defence (including preventing assault) - The complainants were the accused's wife (Pratt) and her male friend (Pelletier) - Pratt and Pelletier drove to the accused's house - The accused was holding a knife when he came to the door - The complainants testified that the accused threatened to kill them - Pratt and Pelletier returned to their vehicle and drove away - The accused was charged with uttering threats and assault with a weapon - The accused denied that he had threatened to kill the complainants, or that he had threatened them with a knife - He testified that prior to Pratt and Pelletier arriving at his house, he had been warned by friends to "watch his back" - He was also aware that Pelletier had once been convicted of manslaughter - He testified that he had picked up the knife for protection - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench acquitted the accused on all charges - Section 34(1) of the Code applied - The accused had a reasonable apprehension that Pratt and Pelletier might do him harm - By bringing a knife to the door as a defence tool, he had used no more force than was necessary to prevent an anticipated attack - The court had a reasonable doubt that the accused had uttered threats - The court preferred the accused's evidence over the complainants' - The evidence of Pratt and Pelletier was inconsistent in some parts and appeared to be rehearsed in others - See paragraphs 45 to 68.

Criminal Law - Topic 1420

Offences against person and reputation - Assaults - Defence - Self-defence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 239 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Antley, [1964] 1 O.R. 545; 2 C.C.C. 142 (C.A.), folld. [para. 58].

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352, folld. [para. 60].

Counsel:

William J. Collins, for the Crown;

David W. Andrews, Q.C., for the accused.

This matter was heard before Whitmore, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Wynyard, who delivered the following judgment on November 16, 2012.