- By: Aswani Datt
- self defence
- July 14, 2024
- Comments (0)
There is no legal rule as to the general dangerousness of chokeholds. Each case must be assessed on its own facts.
The dangerousness of a chokehold can vary based on factors such as its nature, force and length. The proposition that a chokehold is always an inherently dangerous act runs the risk of inappropriately injecting an objective element into the mens rea analysis for murder.
The subjective foresight required for murder is focused solely on what the accused intended, and the analysis cannot consider what the accused ought to have known about the inherent dangerousness of a chokehold. Thus, when considering the mens rea for murder, a trial judge should not be and cannot be required to assess an accused’s intention against the fact that someone else in their position should have or would have been aware of the danger the chokehold posed.
Accordingly, for an accused to be convicted of murder, it is not sufficient for the Crown to prove that a particular accused knew that a chokehold in the circumstances was dangerous or that a reasonable person in the accused’s position would have known that the chokehold would cause bodily harm that was likely to cause death. Neither of these findings would meet the requisite level of subjective intent required for a murder conviction, namely that the accused intended to cause death or that the accused intended to cause bodily harm that they knew was likely to cause death but was reckless as to whether or not death ensued.
Source: R. v. Hodgson, 2024 SCC 25 (CanLII),
Frequently Asked Questions
There is no automatic rule that chokeholds are illegal. Courts assess each case individually based on factors such as force used, duration, and the surrounding circumstances.
Yes. Even if you claim self-defence, you can still be charged with offences such as assault, manslaughter, or even murder depending on the outcome and level of force used.
Canadian law requires that your actions be reasonable and proportional to the threat. If the force used exceeds what was necessary to stop the threat, it may not qualify as self-defence.
Yes. Courts consider your intent. If the chokehold was used to restrain or protect yourself rather than to cause serious harm, this may support a self-defence claim.
It can be. A chokehold may be viewed as potentially dangerous or even lethal depending on how it is applied, how long it is held, and the resulting injuries.
Courts may look at:
- The level of threat you faced
- Whether force was imminent
- The duration and pressure of the chokehold
- Your role in the incident
- Whether less forceful options were available
Possibly, but it becomes much more complex. The court will closely examine whether your actions were reasonable and necessary in the circumstances.
Yes. Continuing to apply force after the threat has been neutralized can undermine a self-defence claim and lead to criminal charges.
In some cases, yes. Your training and knowledge may be considered when determining whether your actions were reasonable and whether you understood the risks involved.
Generally no. Self-defence law in Canada emphasizes de-escalation and minimal force. A chokehold may be scrutinized if less forceful options were available.
- Avoid speaking to police without legal advice
- Do not provide statements or explanations
- Contact a criminal defence lawyer immediately
- Assess whether your actions were legally justified
- Challenge how evidence is interpreted
- Argue that your response was reasonable in the circumstances
Immediately. Early legal advice can significantly impact whether charges are laid or how your case is defended.
Yes. Self-defence is a legal argument raised in court, not a guarantee against arrest.
Costs vary depending on complexity, but most firms offer an initial consultation to review your situation.
