R. v. Rezaei
Court: Ontario Court of Justice Date: September 11, 2025 Location: Newmarket
Between: His Majesty the King — and — Omid Rezaei
JUDGMENT
Evidence and Submissions Heard: April 16, 17, 2025 Delivered: September 11, 2025
Counsel:
- Ms. Ramandeep Gill — counsel for the Crown
- Mr. Pasquale Morabito — counsel for the defendant
KENKEL J.:
Introduction
1This was a difficult relationship right from the outset. Mr. Rezaei testified that he and the complainant started couples counselling shortly after getting married in Iran. They continued to attend counselling on and off until their separation in May of 2022. In August of 2023, the complainant reported to police that there had been several incidents of violence during the marriage.
2Mr. Rezaei was charged with three counts of Assault s 266, one count of Assault with a Weapon s 267, one count of Assault Causing Bodily Harm (ABH) s 267(b), one count of Assault by Choking s 267(c), one count of Uttering a Death Threat s 264.1(1)(a) and one count of Uttering a Threat to Cause Bodily Harm s 264.1(1)(a).
3The charge of Uttering a Death Threat (count 7) was dismissed at the close of the evidence. The remaining allegations can be grouped as follows:
- 2013 North York – Assault, Assault with a Weapon (pillow)
- 2019 Aurora – Assault, ABH, Assault Choking (birds)
- 2022 Vaughan – Assault, Threaten Bodily Harm (tile/IKEA)
4The complainant and the accused both testified at trial. There were no other witnesses. The central issue at trial is credibility, assessed in the context of the burden on the Crown to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. The test is not which witness is generally more credible, but whether the evidence as a whole leaves a reasonable doubt on any or all of the counts.
2013 North York - Assault, Assault with a Weapon
5The complainant testified that in 2013 there was an incident when they were living in Toronto in a basement with the rest of her family upstairs. The only thing she could recall was that at one point Mr. Rezaei placed a pillow over her mouth and she thought she would die.
6She was unable to recall what the argument was about, how the incident progressed, or how long the pillow was placed over her mouth. She did not recall how the pillow was removed. She thought she screamed at some point to alert her family upstairs, but she didn't remember if anyone responded.
7In cross-examination the complainant agreed that she really couldn't recall much about what happened in the 2013 incident.
8Mr. Rezaei recalled that there was an argument in which he became upset when the complainant referred to his family. He "couldn't take it" so he threw a soft pillow at her and he left. He did not place a pillow over her mouth. He thought the incident occurred in Iran.
9The complainant did not recall any other incident in 2013, but the Crown was permitted to show her a page from her original statement to the police. That refreshed her memory as to a second incident that year. She is now unsure about the specific date and she's unsure if they were living at the address mentioned in the statement to the police.
10In the second incident she testified that she wanted to leave the house, and the accused stood in the doorway and wouldn't let her go. The only thing she remembered is that he pushed her down with force causing her to fall. She became frightened as a result.
11In cross-examination she agreed she didn't remember the argument that started this incident. She disagreed that it was her husband who was trying to leave and she pushed him away from the door.
12Mr. Rezaei recalled the incident differently. He was the one who wanted to leave, and she tried to stop him. He pulled open the door and she fell to the floor. Mr. Rezaei remembered more details about the incident than his wife did, but he also could not remember the argument that started it.
2019 Aurora – Assault, ABH, Assault Choking
13The 2019 incident started with an argument about birds. Mr. Rezaei was breeding and selling birds and he was keeping the birds in several cages in the basement. That regularly brought strangers into the house to look at and purchase birds.
14One day the complainant had enough. She went into the basement to open the cages to let the birds go free. Mr. Rezaei followed and tried to stop her. She said he closed the main cage door on her hand. She grabbed the cage, and he pushed at the cage from the other side back and forth until she fell to the ground.
15While she was on the ground, the complainant said Mr. Rezaei got onto her back and hit her for two or three minutes with his fists. He then lifted her up as she couldn't stand and put his hands around her neck, strangling her. She had difficulty breathing. The choking lasted less than 1 minute, then he released his hands. He told her that she would die in the basement and her family would never know where she was. He kicked her on the side of her body. She thought she might die.
16She motioned to him that she needed her asthma puffer, and he left the basement. He returned and told her he could not find it. She then remembered that she had finished her current puffer. He dragged her upstairs and put her in the guest room, lying on the floor with her feet on a sofa. He went to the pharmacy to get a puffer, and she dragged herself to the front door to get help. She couldn't stand, walk or see very well. She was able to open the door and crawl outside. A neighbour called an ambulance after she explained she needed a puffer and didn't have one. She did not mention the altercation or the assault.
17Her hand was injured. At the hospital they placed her hand in a metal and foam brace as shown in the two photos marked as Exhibit #1. The nerves in her hand were damaged. She was on Employment Insurance for a while and then the COVID pandemic extended the time she was off work. She lived with her sister for several months before she returned home.
18In cross-examination the complainant agreed that in 2019 she was unhappy about the increasing number of birds in their basement. Mr. Rezaei told her and the couples counsellor that he would get rid of the birds, but he never did. She did not recall ever throwing a shoe at a bird cage or killing a bird with a shoe. She was fed up though, and on the day in question she went downstairs to let the birds out. She described the pushing at the cage as coming from her husband, but her arm motions while she said that demonstrated vigorous back and forth pushing and pulling that would have involved both parties. She didn't know why she fell to the ground.
19Mr. Rezaei said he had about 20 canaries living in several cages at the time. One of the cages was quite big as the complainant described. When they got married in Iran he gave up the pigeons he was keeping, but now that they had more space he wanted to keep some canaries. They started breeding and things changed quickly. He didn't want his wife letting the birds go free, particularly as it was November and too cold for birds not native to Canada.
20Mr. Rezaei agreed that his wife opened the door to the large cage. He said she threw a slipper in the cage. One of the birds fell to the floor and died. He said she was the one pushing the cage. He loved the birds so he didn't want to upset them. She opened the door and shook the cage but none of the birds came out. His wife screamed and swore at him, then attacked him by grabbing his shirt. He pushed her down and she fell on the floor. After that it appeared she was having an asthma attack brought on by anxiety. He tried to help by finding her medication.
21He dragged her up the basement stairs and lay her down in the living room with her feet raised on the sofa. He went to the pharmacy to try and get a refill, but the pharmacy would not give him the medication. He returned home and saw his wife on the porch lying down. He went to the hospital after the ambulance left. He went to the Emergency room, but his wife motioned to have him removed. He went to work after calling her sister.
22His wife did not return home but stayed at her sister's house for a month. She didn't come home by herself, he had to bring her back.
2022 Vaughan – Assault, Threaten Bodily Harm
23In April of 2022 the complainant changed her mind and told her husband to return tiles from their renovation project. He tried, but the store wouldn't take them back. The $500 loss for a change of mind angered Mr. Rezaei. They drove to IKEA and the complainant said he was angry and screaming during their drive. When they arrived, she told him that he failed to keep his promise not to scream at her. She went to the driver's side of the car and told him to move over as she no longer wanted to go to IKEA. He shouldn't drive when he's that upset. Eventually he gave in and moved over.
24She drove, but once again Mr. Rezaei started screaming at her. She stopped the car and told him to get out. She said he pushed her head down towards the console gear shift area and started hitting her on her head, neck and shoulder with his fists. He pulled up her sweater over her head while hitting her. He told her that she would be confined to a wheelchair for the rest of her life, and he would be incarcerated for the rest of his life. She told him she would call the police. Mr. Rezaei left the car, and she did not see where he went. She drove home but he was not there.
25In cross-examination she agreed that although she said she'd wished someone had seen the altercation at the IKEA lot and called the police, she did not do so herself. She explained that to call the police is a "very huge decision" and she had to be sure what she was going to do. She was very reluctant to call the police throughout their marriage as her counsellor and therapist had told her of the consequences. It would be the biggest decision of her life and put an end to her marriage. She disagreed with the suggestion in cross-examination that the reason she didn't call police was because the events did not happen the way she described them in her testimony.
26In re-examination the complainant was asked about a copy of a letter, handwritten in Farsi, that had been put to her in cross-examination. It was a list of issues that had been discussed in marriage counselling and contained promises by Mr. Rezaei to do better. One sentence included the following, "I have raised my hand on my wife? Yes, two times." The complainant testified that "raise my hand" is an idiom in Farsi referring to physical violence.
27Mr. Rezaei explained that the reason he was angry in the IKEA parking lot was that he'd shopped with his wife at several tile stores. The tiles she chose were on clearance so when she changed her mind the store would not accept the return. They were doing renovations and money was tight. He raised his voice but did not yell. He didn't push her or touch her. He resisted getting out of the car when told to do so as it was his car. She grabbed his shirt to pull him out, so he moved over to the passenger side. She drove fast in a reckless manner, so he got out and took the bus to a friend's house. He didn't hit or threaten her that day.
28Mr. Rezaei explained that the letter marked as Exhibit #2 was written at the suggestion of a counsellor and contained promises such as not to raise his voice and to take his wife out on a date once per week. He said "raising hand" in this context did not necessarily mean hitting someone but could be raising his hand in a threat without that action.
Analysis
29The complainant and Mr. Rezaei separated on May 23, 2022. The complainant said she always reported these incidents to her social worker and to a couples counsellor they saw. It was advice from several parties that led her to decide to leave. She described the final decision to report these complaints to the police as one of the biggest decisions she's had to make as it ended her life with Mr. Rezaei.
30Over the course of their relationship the complainant went to a women's shelter three times. After they separated in 2022, she stayed at a women's shelter for about 3 months. She said she'd stayed in shelters twice before for shorter periods after the 2013 and 2016 incidents.
31I have considered the evidence at trial as a whole and I make the findings of fact and the assessments of reliability and credibility in that context. I have divided the analysis by incident for ease of discussion.
32The complainant testified in a direct manner. She admitted misconduct on her part including her interference with the accused's birds which put them in danger. She also conceded a lack of memory on certain points, particularly in relation to older incidents. Her testimony was not shown to be internally inconsistent in a detailed cross-examination. Her evidence is consistent with external circumstances including the agreed fact that the complainant left several times to stay in women's shelters.
33The accused also testified in a direct manner. He remembered each incident, including the earliest allegations. While I do not reject all of his evidence, his testimony that no physical violence or threats occurred during these incidents was shown to be inconsistent with the surrounding circumstances, inconsistent with his letter in which he described "raising his hand" against his wife twice during their marriage, and inconsistent with the credible evidence of the complainant.
Analysis – 2013 Toronto
34The complainant was not able to recall the details of the 2013 pillow incident. She did not recall the other doorway incident at all until she was shown her original statement to the police. Even then she was uncertain about the details. That's understandable given the passage of time, but I find the evidence does not reasonably provide a basis for rejecting the accused's evidence on these counts and could not otherwise result in a conviction.
Analysis – 2019 Aurora
35The complainant went downstairs to the basement with the intention of opening the bird cages to let the birds go free. The door of the house was open, and it was November. The birds were not native to Canada and would not have survived.
36Mr. Rezaei intervened in order to protect his birds. The complainant shook the cage as the birds would not come out. The allegation of assault causing bodily harm refers to the injury to the complainant's hand. Mr. Rezaei was entitled to protect his property and protect the life of his birds. He was entitled to use reasonable force to do so if necessary. The two-way altercation was initiated by the complainant and continued by her. It's not plain how she injured her hand during the frantic struggle for control of the cage. It may well have happened during the pulling back and forth given the large size of the cage. She was upset enough to try and set the birds free in her house in an attempt to force them outside. He was very attached to his birds and tried to minimize the cage movement to avoid harming them. I find the Crown has failed to prove that the accused deliberately or recklessly injured her hand or that his actions to that point were unreasonable.
37Mr. Rezaei's testimony showed that his birds are very important to him and raising birds is a part of his culture. It's understandable that the attempt to force the birds outside upset him. He testified that his wife attacked him afterwards and he put his hand on her shoulders and pushed her down onto the floor. The complainant was candid about the fact that she could not remember this part of the incident or how she came to be on the floor.
38Once she was on the floor the complainant testified that Mr. Rezaei sat on her back and hit her several times. Then he lifted her up and put his hands around her neck applying pressure. She had difficulty breathing. This lasted less than a minute. The incident triggered her asthma. She motioned to him that she needed her puffer.
39The complainant's testimony was consistent internally and consistent with her physical state after the struggle. Neither witness gave any reason why the complainant would attack her husband. It's plain though that the attempt to get rid of the birds very much upset Mr. Rezaei. His assault on his wife is not a natural or acceptable response, but it is consistent with his reaction at the time to his wife's attempt to force the birds outside.
40The accused's testimony that his wife merely had an asthma attack due to anxiety was inconsistent with her inability to stand while upstairs, and the pain in her neck, shoulders and back. If the struggle was limited to the cage and some injury to her hand, Mr. Rezaei would not have had to drag his wife up the stairs. She would not have had to drag herself outside to be found by neighbours. Her asthma was a pre-existing condition, but it was mild. Mild enough that she didn't have current medication and backup medication in the house.
41The fact that the complainant had Mr. Rezaei removed from the hospital emergency room and that she did not return home for over a month is also consistent with her account. Those circumstances are inconsistent with Mr. Rezaei's testimony which described only one push away after the struggle over the cage.
42Considering the evidence as a whole, I find the Crown has failed to prove the Assault Causing Bodily Harm (count 5). I find the Crown has proved the Assault and Assault Choking (counts 4 and 6) beyond a reasonable doubt. I can find no credible evidence that reasonably could leave a doubt on those charges.
Analysis – 2022 Vaughan
43Mr. Rezaei was understandably upset with the direction to return tiles given the process to select them and the fact that the change of mind was costly. His evidence of a frustrated conversation without swearing is inconsistent with the rest of the evidence, starting with the fact that his wife got out of the passenger seat and said he should not be driving when he's so upset. That's a fact they both agree on, yet there would be no reason for her to do that if the conversation was as he described. That circumstance is only consistent with the complainant's evidence of a higher degree of anger that could potentially distract his driving.
44They both agreed that Mr. Rezaei was further angered by having to stop driving his own car. In that context, I find the complainant's evidence credible that the accused lost his temper, pushed her head down and hit her, all accompanied by the threats she described.
45Mr. Rezaei testified that he got out of the car at IKEA and went to stay at a friend's house that night. His wife was driving dangerously at high speed in the IKEA parking lot, and he got out of his car for his safety. The suggestion that the complainant was driving in a dangerous manner to force the accused out of the car was never put to her in cross-examination. The reason she took control of the car was so that they would both be safe. The accused's departure at IKEA and his failure to return home that evening are circumstances that are consistent with her evidence that there was a physical assault and threats, and she told him to leave. She also told him she would contact the police.
46In cross-examination the complainant confirmed that at one point just after Mr. Rezaei left, she saw a police car in the distance. The defence suggested that she didn't complain about the assault that day because it didn't happen. The complainant explained that she was aware through extensive counselling what would happen if she made that complaint. It would be the end of her marriage and the end of this part of her life. She said it was a "huge decision and I had to be sure what I was going to do". Her explanation for the delayed report to the police was credible, particularly in light of the trauma she experienced during the marriage. The mention of seeing the police was part of a recollection that she wished at the time that someone had intervened in the IKEA parking lot.
47The evidence of Mr. Rezaei on these two counts (count 8 Assault, count 9 Threaten Bodily Harm) was not credible, nor did it reasonably leave a doubt either alone or in combination with other evidence. The complainant's evidence was consistent, logical and credible. There was no other evidence that reasonably could leave a doubt on these counts.
Conclusion
48Mr. Rezaei was charged with 9 offences. He was not arraigned on count #3 and that charge is dismissed. Count 7 was dismissed earlier. Counts 1 and 2 are dismissed. Count 5 is dismissed.
49I find the Crown has proved the following counts beyond a reasonable doubt: the Assault alleged in count 4, the Assault with Choking alleged in count 6 and the Assault and Utter Threats alleged in counts 8 and 9.
Delivered: September 11, 2025
Justice Joseph F. Kenkel