Aggravated / bodily-harm assault

The charge arose from an altercation with a person the client knew socially. The Crown's theory placed responsibility for a specific injury on the client. The client's account of what had happened, why it happened, and how the injury occurred was materially different.

Aggravated assault is one of the most serious assault offences on the Code — a Crown-election indictable offence carrying significant sentencing exposure. The path to a proportionate resolution often runs through the exact severity of the offence.

Whether the injury alleged met the threshold of 'aggravated' under s. 268 — wounds, maims, disfigures, or endangers life.

Whether s. 34 self-defence was available and, if so, on which subsection of the three-limb analysis.

Instruction of a medical review to test the causation and the severity classification of the alleged injury.

Detailed timeline reconstruction of the incident from every angle available — client, any video, and any admissions.

Written self-defence framing under the current s. 34 test, applied to the specific facts and the surrounding circumstances.

• The threshold difference between assault, assault causing bodily harm, and aggravated assault.
• The three limbs of s. 34: reasonable perception of a threat, defensive purpose, and reasonableness of the response.
• Any Crown-brought forensic evidence and its assumptions.
• Sentencing outcomes across the assault spectrum — from discharges through custodial ranges on the aggravated count.

Assault charges span a very wide sentencing range. Where the file supports it, moving the analysis from a more serious count to a less serious count — or to a self-defence position — is often the difference that matters.

Every assault file at Saggi Law Firm is worked with the range of possible outcomes in view.