Dangerous Driving Withdrawn – Lack of Intent
Dangerous driving charges require more than speed or an accident. The Crown Attorney must prove that the driver’s actions were a marked and dangerous departure from normal driving behaviour, along with a level of intent or awareness of the risk.
Intent refers to a conscious or deliberate driving choice that creates danger. An accident, on the other hand, can happen in a moment of panic, distraction, or misjudgment without any plan to drive dangerously.
In this case, a careful review of the evidence showed that the incident was the result of panic and inexperience, not a deliberate or planned action. As a result, the Crown withdrew the charge.
Where you need to speak with a criminal lawyer, call Charitsis Law at 647-930-0200.
Facts of the Case
On June 1, 2013, a police officer was conducting radar enforcement on Highway 400 when a Jeep was observed travelling at a high rate of speed. The officer obtained a reading of approximately 150 km/h in a 100 km/h zone.
The officer began to pursue the vehicle and activated the emergency lights and siren. Despite the police cruiser being directly behind her, the driver did not immediately pull over.
As the officer moved into the left lane and accelerated, he came alongside the vehicle. At that point, the Jeep increased speed to approximately 160 km/h.
It was only when the officer pulled slightly ahead and motioned for the driver to stop that she became aware of the police presence.
What followed happened quickly.
The driver began to slow down and attempted to pull over to the right side of the highway. However, as she did so:
- she focused her attention on the police vehicle beside her
- she abruptly applied her brakes
- she lost awareness of her position on the roadway
The Jeep left the roadway, struck a 4×4 post, and then collided with a large warning barrel before coming to a stop.
The officer immediately approached the vehicle to check on the driver. She was alone and not injured. After speaking with her, the officer confirmed:
- there was no alcohol involved
- there was no evidence of drug impairment
- the incident was not related to intoxication
Despite this, the officer decided rightly or wrongly so that this situation amounted to dangerous driving.
The case went to trial whereupon on the trial date, the crown attorney agreed with defence counsel, that the situation did not amount to dangerous driving, there was no intent, and that an unintended accident is what happened, not a criminal action.
Issues at Trial
The central issue at trial was whether the driver’s actions amounted to dangerous driving, or whether the incident was the result of a mistake caused by panic.
To secure a conviction, the Crown Attorney had to prove that the driving was a marked departure from the standard of a reasonable driver, along with a level of intent or awareness of the risk.
The court focused on several key issues:
- Speed vs. Intent High speed was established, but the court had to decide whether speed alone proved dangerous driving or a deliberate disregard for safety.
- Failure to Stop The Crown argued that the driver continued driving after police activated lights and sirens. The issue was whether this showed intent to evade or simply lack of awareness.
- Driver Awareness Evidence suggested the driver did not initially see or hear the police vehicle. The court had to determine whether her actions were intentional or the result of being startled.
- Panic Reaction Once aware of police, the driver reacted abruptly and lost control. The issue was whether this reaction amounted to criminal conduct or a momentary error.
These issues were critical because dangerous driving requires more than poor judgment. If the conduct does not show a clear and intentional departure from normal driving behaviour, the charge cannot be proven.
Judge’s Decision
After reviewing the evidence, the Crown Attorney determined that the charge of dangerous driving could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and withdrew the case.
While the police officer believed the driver’s actions met the legal test for dangerous driving, the evidence did not support that conclusion. The police officer was wrong and this case illustrates that police officers make mistakes.
Dangerous driving requires proof of a marked and intentional departure from normal driving behaviour. In this case, the evidence showed a moment of panic and inexperience, not a deliberate or planned act.
It was clear to the court, that the accused didn’t initially see the police vehicle, and when they did they panicked, the driver then swerved, lost control and an accident happened. There was no intent and no criminal action. The situation was a accident only.
The charge was withdrawn and the case was dismissed.
Intent vs. Mistake in Criminal Law
In criminal law, the difference between a mistake and intentional conduct is often the most important issue in a case. Many situations may look serious at first, but the law requires proof that the accused meant to act in a way that created risk or chose to ignore that risk.
Intent refers to a conscious or deliberate decision. A mistake, on the other hand, can happen quickly due to panic, confusion, or inexperience. The law recognizes that not every poor decision amounts to a criminal offence.
This distinction applies across many types of charges, including:
- Dangerous Driving The Crown must prove a marked and intentional departure from normal driving behaviour, not just an error or moment of panic.
- Care and Control Being near a vehicle while impaired is not enough. The Crown must show a real risk of danger based on the accused’s actions.
- Refuse Breath Test A conviction requires proof that the accused intentionally refused, not that they were confused, unsure, or unable to comply.
In many cases, the defence focuses on showing that what happened was a mistake rather than intentional conduct. When that distinction is properly understood, it can create reasonable doubt and lead to charges being withdrawn or dismissed.
This is why it is important to speak with a criminal defence lawyer before making any decisions about your case. Many people do not realize that they may not be guilty in the first place, especially where the law requires proof of intent.
Speak With a Criminal Defence Lawyer Today
If you have been charged with a criminal offence, it is important to understand where you stand before making any decisions. Many cases involve legal defences or issues that are not obvious at first, including problems with the evidence or whether the Crown can prove intent.
A criminal lawyer can review your case, explain the court process, and identify possible defence strategies that you may not have realized.
Call Charitsis Law at 647-930-0200 for a free and confidential discussion. Speak directly with a criminal lawyer and get clear guidance on your next steps.
