After a trial on charges arising from an early-morning parking lot encounter, the court accepted the complainant's evidence that the accused threatened to rape her and made hateful anti-Muslim remarks after she tried to end the conversation.
Applying the W. (D.) framework, the court rejected the accused's account as internally implausible and inconsistent with surveillance evidence, while finding the complainant credible and materially corroborated by video and contemporaneous phone activity.
The court held that the proven conduct amounted to threatening conduct causing reasonable fear for safety under s. 264(2)(d) of the Criminal Code.
On the uttering threats count, the court amended the charge under s. 601(2) from a threat of death to a threat of bodily harm to conform to the evidence, and entered a conviction.
