The defendant was charged with assault with a weapon following an altercation at a public rally.
The Crown alleged the defendant used his cane to strike the complainant in the face, causing a bloodied nose.
The defendant claimed his actions were justified in defence of his son, whom he alleged the complainant had threatened to kill, and in defence of his property (the cane).
The court rejected the defendant's evidence and defences after reviewing video evidence that contradicted key aspects of his testimony.
The court found the defendant guilty of assault with a weapon.
