GUILTY or NOT?CDN version

GUILTY or NOT? CDN / Case library / Firearms & Weapons

The Threat in the Range

R v Kerr (2004)

Charge: Possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace (s. 88) Court: Supreme Court of Canada Province: Alberta Heard on GUILTY or NOT? CDN: 3 October 2026

The facts

The Accused was an inmate in a federal penitentiary. The evening before the events in question, another inmate demanded coffee from him and told him that if the coffee did not appear, a guard would find the Accused with his head smashed. The Accused armed himself. The next day the two men fought in the prison dining area and the other inmate was killed. The Accused was charged with second degree murder and with possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace. The trial judge acquitted him on both counts, finding that he had armed himself to defend against an attack he believed was coming. The Crown appealed, and the Court of Appeal substituted a conviction on the weapons count. The Crown's position was that a homemade weapon carried inside a penitentiary is dangerous to the public peace whatever the carrier says his reason was. The Defence position was that arming yourself against an imminent, unlawful attack is not a purpose dangerous to the public peace at all.

You have the facts the court had. Did the Crown prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? Render your verdict in the game, then see what the court actually decided — and why.

Citation: R v Kerr, 2004 SCC 44, [2004] 2 SCR 371

Read the full decision at scc-csc.ca. The source reveals the outcome.