An Investigative Measure - Case Study Example

He also added that the first victim had provoked the other two victims who were drinking beer. The third witness said that he had seen the first victim using his knife and cutting the knuckles of the latter two, while one of the other victims had broken the beer bottle on his head. The last witness, however, changed the story and said that he had not seen the first victim carrying any weapon or provoking the other victims.

By assessing the common witness statements given, one can conclude that the first victim had indeed provoked the other two, who had, in a bid to safeguard their lives, assaulted the first victim. In accordance with the Canadian Criminal Code, it is stated that an assault is justified if the assaulter had been provoked by the victim, and had done so in an attempt to save his life or to protect himself from sustaining grave injuries.

Even though the statement of the victim is pending, one can certainly conclude from witnesses' statements that it is but inevitable for the latter two victims to do anything other than using what they possess in immediacy---the beer bottle. Therefore, it is recommended that the first victim be imprisoned for fifteen months, up to a maximum of eighteen months, as per the criminal code. The latter two could be charged monetarily.

It is very important for the judicial setup to eye this case as a threat to public security and safety since individuals with weapons on the sprawl can threaten the very trust of the public in the judicial and security system. Therefore, it is important to establish public trust and security.