A provincial court judge in Corner Brook Newfoundland and Labrador, has ordered an eighteen year old man to enter into a peace bond after finding that his former girlfriend had a reasonable fear for her safety1. The decision, released on January 2, 2026, by Judge Gorman, follows a series of incidents involving stalking, aggressive driving, and a lack of emotional control. Beyond the specific conflict between the two teenagers, the court used the ruling to voice significant concerns regarding how local police handle complaints of intimate partner harassment. Judge Gorman noted that when police tell victims to seek their own peace bonds rather than conducting a full investigation, they may be placing those individuals in dangerous or even life threatening positions.
The legal dispute involves a seventeen year old girl identified as SW and an eighteen year old man identified as BB. The two had dated while attending high school together, but SW eventually decided to end the relationship. According to the evidence presented in court, BB did not handle the breakup well. He admitted during the hearing that he has a temper and that he was angry about the separation. This anger first became physically apparent during an incident at a grandparents’ cabin in early September 2025. While the two were arguing in a truck, BB became so enraged that he punched the steering wheel of the vehicle approximately five times. He hit the wheel with such force that he injured his hand and had to go to the hospital for medical treatment. He also threw his keys into the woods in a fit of frustration, requiring his mother to drive to the cabin the next day to bring him a spare set.
Following this incident, the court heard testimony regarding several months of alleged harassment. SW told the court that BB followed her around a local shopping mall and called her derogatory names in public. She also described several terrifying encounters on the road. Between May and September of 2025, SW claimed that BB would follow her while she was driving the family’s Mazda. She testified that he would drive extremely close to her bumper and turn on his high beam lights to blind or intimidate her. In one specific instance near the Civic Center in Corner Brook, she said he followed her closely while swerving his truck across the road.
The harassment was not limited to the road. SW’s parents also testified that they witnessed BB driving his silver Chevrolet Silverado up and down their street. The truck was described as being very distinctive because it had custom lights installed underneath the body and in the wheel wells. The parents testified that they saw him driving by their home at least five times and would often hear him revving his engine as he passed. The situation became so concerning for the family that they decided to install security cameras at their residence and eventually contacted the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary for help.
However, the police response to these calls became a central point of criticism in Judge Gorman’s written decision. When SW’s mother contacted the police on three separate occasions, she was told to apply for a peace bond under Section 810 of the Criminal Code. A peace bond is a court order that requires a person to keep the peace and be of good behavior for a specific period, usually up to one year. Judge Gorman argued that the police are too often using these applications as a substitute for doing their own investigative work. He stated that the police in the area commonly suggest peace bonds as an alternative to their own intervention and that this practice needs to stop.
The judge was particularly concerned about the impact this has on women who do not have a lot of money. Because Legal Aid generally does not provide lawyers for people applying for peace bonds, victims are often left to navigate the court system entirely on their own. The judge wrote that for women of limited means who are told by police to seek their own legal protection, they have essentially been abandoned by the system. He noted that if the police fail to assess the risk level or speak directly to the person making the complaint, they are failing in their duty to protect the public.
During the hearing, BB denied many of the allegations. He admitted to the incident at the cabin and conceded that he had a temper, but he denied following SW or driving past her house intentionally. His defense relied heavily on technology, specifically security footage from his father’s business and data from a mobile app called Life 360. This app is often used by families to track the real time locations of children or partners on a map. BB’s mother presented maps from the app which suggested that on one specific night, October 16, 2025, BB’s vehicle remained at his home for nearly two days straight.
The court looked closely at this digital evidence. While the Life 360 data suggested BB was home on that specific Thursday, the judge found other aspects of the digital defense to be suspicious. For example, the security camera footage provided by BB’s family started at a time that would have allowed him to drive home quickly after an alleged incident. Furthermore, the judge found that while the technology might create doubt about one single night, it did not disprove the many other incidents described by SW and her parents.
Judge Gorman found SW to be a very credible and direct witness. He noted that her testimony was supported by her mother’s account of a specific incident in mid-September. On that day, SW’s mother was driving the family Mazda, which was the car SW usually drove. She testified that BB’s truck pulled in behind her and followed her all the way to her street, driving aggressively with his fog lights on. The judge concluded that BB likely thought he was following SW and that this confirmed the pattern of stalking behavior.
In analyzing the law, the judge explained that for a peace bond to be issued, the person applying for it must show that they have a fear that is both subjective and objective. This means that the person must truly be afraid, and there must also be a logical, factual reason for that fear to exist. The judge ruled that SW had met this burden. He pointed to the violent outburst at the cabin as evidence that BB could not control his anger toward his former girlfriend. He also found that the repeated incidents of following her in a vehicle created a genuine danger.
The final ruling requires BB to enter into a Section 810 recognizance. This legal document will include specific conditions that BB must follow, such as staying a certain distance away from SW and her home. If he breaks any of these rules, he could face criminal charges and potential jail time. The judge has scheduled a follow up meeting with the lawyers for both sides to determine the exact wording of these conditions.
The case serves as a reminder of the legal protections available to those facing harassment after a breakup, even when criminal charges are not immediately laid by police. It also highlights the ongoing tension between the judiciary and law enforcement regarding the proper handling of domestic and intimate partner disputes. By granting the peace bond, the court aimed to provide SW with the security she felt she had lost since the end of her relationship.
