The appellant, a teacher assistant, was convicted of assault for grabbing a seven-year-old boy by the throat.
On appeal, she argued the trial judge misapprehended evidence regarding video timestamps and erred in rejecting the defence of corrective force under s. 43 of the Criminal Code.
The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the timestamp evidence was not properly authenticated as real evidence, and even if it were, it did not render the verdict unreasonable.
The court also upheld the trial judge's rejection of the s. 43 defence, concluding that the force was applied out of anger and frustration, not for educative or corrective purposes, and therefore did not meet the requirements for justification under the section.