Court dismisses Kinngait man’s appeal of assault convictions

David Mikkigak argued his original trial judge erred

The Nunavut Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal of an aggravated assault conviction of David Mikkigak in a decision handed down May 14. (File photo)

By Kierstin Williams

A Nunavut court has dismissed an appeal from a Kinngait man convicted of aggravated assault and assault with a weapon against his longtime partner.

David Mikkigak was convicted in October 2019 of three criminal offences stemming from the assault of a woman with whom he shares four children and two grandchildren.

His appeal was heard by the Nunavut Court of Appeal on May 14, but three judges upheld the original convictions, according to a copy of their written decision provided to the media.

In his appeal, Mikkigak argued the original trial judge gave insufficient reasons for the aggravated assault conviction, and that the verdict was unsupported by evidence because it was grounded upon a conviction for assault with a weapon that also was unreasonable.

Mikkigak also challenged the convictions on the assertion that the judge erred in his assessment of the complainant’s reliability.

On April 12, 2019, Mikkigak left a woman with severe injuries after he hit her with a chair, punched and kicked her in the head and face. She suffered a broken arm, a shoulder injury, a gash on her head as well as bruising and swelling to her face and was required to be sent to Ottawa for surgeries and treatment of her injuries.

“It is clear from evidence he [the trial judge] did accept that the elements of aggravated assault had been proven beyond a reasonable doubt,” reads the judgment released Wednesday.

“We fail to see how the trial judge’s reasoning on the use of the chair somehow tainted his analysis on the aggravated assault charge,” the judgment further stated.


Share This Story

(2) Comments:

  1. Posted by Colin on

    This story needed to say what the sentence was. People like that need to be locked up for the protection of the community.

    • Posted by alex on

      This is an appeal of a conviction, it simply evaluates if there was an err in the original trial, it has nothing to do with sentencing.


Comments are closed.