Trial on charges of uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm under s. 264.1(1)(a) CC. Issue of whether defence of intoxication was available to the accused.
Desjarlais, 2016 ABPC 182, followed. In that case, Allen PCJ applied the analysis in Tatton, 2015 SCC 33 regarding general versus specific intent classification and concluded that s. 264.1 is a general intent offence: “The mental element of 264.1 is that the accused intended that the words uttered or conveyed be taken seriously … The mental element requires minimal mental acuity. The mental element does not require a heightened mental element such as an ulterior motive, actual knowledge of any consequences, or intent to bring about those consequences.” Social policy considerations also support classification as a general intent offence. Thus, voluntary intoxication falling short of automatism is not a defence.
R. Fedorchuk – Defence Counsel