Mr. Douglas was charged with six driving offences. He disputed that he had used his vehicle as a weapon during this evade police and dangerous driving case. And he disputed the bodily harm element as well (main details are at R. v. Douglas, 2020 SKQB 57). He was acquitted of assault with a weapon, but was convicted of evade causing bodily harm:
I am unable to find therein proof that Mr. Douglas intended to use his vehicle as a weapon. The actions as recorded in the video record are consistent with collisions that were the result of efforts to evade the police while travelling at excessive speeds in a vehicle that was damaged and had control problems. The evidence establishes clearly that Cst. Bear did suffer bodily harm. Medical evidence is not necessary to prove bodily harm. The fact of bodily harm was proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the evidence of Cst. Bear himself. R. v. Douglas, 2020 SKQB 155