2004 BCCA 28

In 2004 BCCA 28, Det. C had been investigation a break and enter involving Mr. S and his former girlfriend. Following this investigation, Mr. S left four messages on Det. C’s answering machine and five on the machine of his former girlfriend’s mother that were directed at Det. C that contained veiled threats. The trial judge did not find that Det. C was harassed because it was “not the repeated communication that led to this fear, but the content of the messages”.[1] However, at the appellant level, the court found that the trial judge had combined considerations under 264(2)(b) – harassment for repeated communication – and 264(2)(d) – harassment caused by threats, which resulted an error in law.

A new trial was ordered.

[1] 2003 BCPC 86 at para 12.


Criminal Offence(s): Criminal Harassment