The Crown appealed an acquittal for criminal harassment under s. 264 of the Criminal Code.
The trial judge had excluded evidence regarding the content of prior communications between the accused and the complainant and then concluded that the complainant’s fear was not reasonable.
The Superior Court held that prior conduct evidence is presumptively admissible in criminal harassment cases because it provides the context necessary to assess reasonable fear and the accused’s intent or recklessness.
The court further held that the trial judge erred by excluding the evidence without considering less drastic remedies and that the resulting acquittal was unreasonable given the findings of repeated unwanted contact and continued behaviour after police warnings.
The acquittal was set aside and a new trial ordered.
