The accused was charged with several firearms offences after taking a firearm and ammunition from a vehicle and delivering them to an acquaintance for safekeeping.
The defence argued that the accused acted under duress arising from threats of death or serious bodily harm by an abusive partner with a violent criminal history.
The court assessed the common law defence of duress using the framework from Supreme Court of Canada authorities and considered evidence of threats, fear, the accused’s circumstances including drug dependency and abuse, and whether a safe avenue of escape existed.
The court concluded that the threats were credible, temporally connected to the accused’s conduct, and reasonably believed by the accused.
Although alternatives may have existed objectively, the accused’s circumstances undermined the availability of a safe avenue of escape, and the proportionality requirement was satisfied.
