Intruder in Lindsay, Ont., break-in used a crossbow, court documents say
The recent incident in Lindsay, Ont., where a man was charged in an early-morning break-in involving a crossbow has sparked a national debate on self-defence laws in Canada. Court documents revealed that Michael Kyle Breen, the alleged intruder in the case, was out on probation at the time of the incident.
The violent confrontation on Aug. 18 resulted in charges against both Breen and the resident of the home, Jeremy David McDonald. Breen is facing multiple charges, including break-and-enter and carrying a weapon, while McDonald is charged with aggravated assault and assault with a weapon.
It was revealed that the two men were acquainted with each other prior to the break-in, as they lived in close proximity to each other. The motive behind the break-in remains unclear, as Kawartha Lakes police have not disclosed any details about the relationship between Breen and McDonald.
The incident has raised questions about the limits of self-defence in Canada, with Premier Doug Ford expressing concerns about the charges laid against McDonald. Ford emphasized the importance of protecting one’s family and property in the face of a threat, suggesting that the current legal system may be flawed.
Legal experts have clarified that self-defence is permissible in Canada as long as it is deemed “reasonable.” Criminal lawyer Tonya Kent explained that the use of force in self-defence must be proportionate to the threat faced, highlighting the importance of exercising caution in such situations.
The Lindsay Police Association reassured the public that thorough investigations are conducted before laying criminal charges, ensuring that the charges align with the evidence and the Criminal Code of Canada. Breen and McDonald are scheduled to appear in court in the coming weeks, where they will have the opportunity to present their respective cases.
McDonald’s lawyer, Steven Norton, has maintained his client’s innocence, asserting that McDonald was acting within his rights to defend himself and his property. The outcome of the case remains uncertain, but it has ignited a broader conversation about the interpretation of self-defence laws in Canada.
