La violence requise selon les différents alinéas de l'article prohibant le vol qualifié

R. v. Bawol, 2010 ABPC 140 (CanLII)

[70] Working from my colleague’s summary of the law, the element of violence in each subsection can be broken down as follows:

For subsection A

The violence:

1. Must accompany the stealing (some of the cases use the phrase be co-existent with )

2. Must be for the purpose of either

(A) Extorting the thing or

(B) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the stealing

3. May be used against either the victim or any other person or property

4. Must be of substantial nature and must be separate from the stealing

5. May be a threat “... which reflects an intent to have recourse to violence in order to carry out the theft or prevent resistance to the theft”:

R. v. Pelletier (see para. 66 of R. v. Callihoo, supra).

Violence required under Subsection B

The violence:

1. must be “proximate” in time and can be either before or after the theft.

2. The subject of the violence must be the victim of the theft.

3. The term “personal violence” takes its colour from the activities listed in the section (wounds, beats or strikes) and so must be more than a technical assault.

4. Purpose is not required; it is gratuitous.

Violence required under Subsection C

The violence:

1. may be any form of assault as defined in section 265 of the Criminal Code. Therefore it may include a technical assault. See R. v. Fleury reflex, (1984), 57 A.R. 239 (C.A.).

2. must accompany the theft.