R v Blankenburg, 2010 YKTC 95 (CanLII)

The accused was charged with 3 counts. (1) Unlawfully committing an offence in that: he did by in person knowingly utter a threat to injure or kill an animal to wit: a dog, contrary to Section 264.1(1)(c) of the Criminal Code. (2) Unlawfully committing an offence in that: he did without lawful excuse point a firearm, to wit: 12 gauge shot gun, at an individual contrary to Section 87 of the Criminal Code. (3) Unlawfully committing an offence in that: he did without lawful excuse, use, carry, or handle a firearm, to wit: a 12 gauge shotgun without reasonable precaution for the safety or other persons, contrary to Section 86(1) of the Criminal Code.

Robin Wilk and his partner, Diedra Etzel, along with couples’ infant son, Diedra Etzel’s mother, Margie Etzel, and Margie Etzel’s dog went fishing at Rose Lake. Hans Blankenburg and his wife had been camping at Rose Lake.

As Mrs. Blankenburg was in the camper and Mr. Blankenburg was sitting by the fire the dog came into the Blankenburg camp. He thought the dog was going to attack him. He grabbed his shotgun and yelled at the dog. At the yell, the dog stopped, Mr. Blankenburg yelled again and the dog ran off.

Mr. Blankenburg, shotgun in hand, stormed toward the site occupied by the Wilk/Etzel party and yelled words to the effect that he would shoot the dog.

The Court found that Mr. Blankenburg’s questionable behaviour rose to the level of criminal conduct when he took up his shotgun and confronted and threatened other persons in the campground when there was no lawful justification for so doing. Finding the accused guilty on counts one and two. Count 3 was conditionally stayed.

Source: Case Law

Jurisdiction: Yukon

Topics: attackcampingCriminal CodedogguiltyGunthreat

Report a Broken Link