As the minister mentioned in his opening remarks, the level of risk doesn't need to be probable or even more likely than not. It's not whether an accused should have known that the drug “would” lead to a violent loss of control but whether the accused should have known that the drug “could” lead to a violent loss of control, and the court's going to look at this from the perspective of a reasonable person. A reasonable person is not someone who's going to testify as to what they knew or what they did. It's going to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
The “reasonable person” is a concept that's well known to the criminal courts. It's someone who's prudent, who thinks before they act, and who takes steps to prevent harm when they see it happening. Courts are going to make a determination about the reasonable person by drawing inferences from the available facts and the evidence, and so the fact that the—