The accused was charged with impaired driving causing bodily harm and dangerous driving causing bodily harm following a late‑night highway collision that injured an occupant of another vehicle.
The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence including erratic driving behaviour, the presence of alcohol containers in the vehicle, witness observations of alcohol odour and slurred speech, and the accused’s statement to a treating nurse that she had consumed alcohol and was fatigued.
The court rejected the accused’s explanation that she had not consumed alcohol that day and found the defence evidence not credible under the W.(D.) framework.
The court concluded that alcohol impaired the accused’s ability to drive and that her driving constituted a marked departure from the standard of a reasonable driver.
Convictions were entered on both counts.
