Unsolved Murders | Missing People Canada

Other Topics => The Justice System => Topic started by: Chris on March 27, 2008, 02:37:14 AM

Title: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on March 27, 2008, 02:37:14 AM
I create this new board to host topics relating to our justice system. I agree we have probably the best system in the world, we do have a lot of holes that need to be filed. I'll start to move some topics buried in 'General' to this place so they will more accessable.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Adrian on March 27, 2008, 04:06:13 AM

JUSTICE????? How rich are ya?

There is more than holes to be filled, there are craters. Let's face it, the peds get off lightly, in time to do more damage, killers are getting off lightly too often, and they fine ya $250.00 for lighting a smoke, in a park!!!!

???    ::)     :P      :-\      :'(     >:(      :-[      ::)      :o      ???    :o
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on March 27, 2008, 06:38:30 AM
I disagree that we have the "best" justice system in the world - we have a 'better' system than many nations, but certainly not the best.  I doubt there can be a best justice system because of the complex nature of its components, processes and what crimes it is dealing with at any one time.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on March 28, 2008, 12:36:34 AM
I disagree that we have the "best" justice system in the world

Well, I cannot think of anyone who has a better one. The USA system has a very good one, but it has a major weakness in that money can buy you freedom. England might. No places in Asia, MIddle East, Africa, South America has anything better.

The laws work, the problem is the participants do not apply properly what already exsists IMO.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on March 28, 2008, 07:09:21 AM
Some nation's laws and processes are better than ours, but over all I think ours is better than most.  The "best" justice system can only be an ideal.

I like the idea of community justice, but I don't think many Canadians are properly suited or prepared to deal with it, especially when it comes to crimes of a sexual or violent nature.  I think that if more cases were heard in community justice forums it would greatly reduce the financial cost of administering justice.  Which is a HUGE problem isn't it?  Less cost I mean.  Less lawyers and judges and clerks and bailiffs. etc.  and they would never go for it.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on March 28, 2008, 07:19:49 PM
That is essentally a trial what you are talking about. But perhaps you mean giving people more of a say in the trial? Yes, that would be great for sex crimes. The victims need to begin to heal and being a part of the process if they choose would help. Make sure justice is given.

There is no perfect justice system. But I do agree, the judges and lawyers have too much say.

When it comes to cost, most Canadians don't care about that. What they want, is for the systme to be effective.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on March 29, 2008, 04:56:13 AM
No, it is not a trial at all.  A trial is a confrontational process with advocates for each side of an accusation with a presiding judge to "weigh" the evidence and make a decision of one sort or another.

Community justice forums is a group process with a facilitator who mediates a dispute between two or more parties to come to a corrective action.  In community justice forums, the perpetrator has already admitted their role and must face the victim, the victim's family and friends, and anyone in the community affected by the act.  The perpetrator must listen to those people, answer all of their questions and then make restitution.  The goal for community justice is to right the wrong.

On small scales, CJF works pretty good, but on larger scales or with more contentious or controversial charges, CJF has its limitations that have yet to be addressed.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on March 30, 2008, 03:00:34 PM
And also some victims probably coun't care less about that process. New York had tried this at one point. It probably has some merit.

But when it comes to sex offences, those suckers will say and do anything to avoid prison so I am not sure it would be effective with them.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on March 31, 2008, 07:16:58 AM
Part of the Community Justice Forums is diversionary - meaning they want to divert people from the court system, jails, prisons, etc.  So if a victim or perpetrator did not cooperate, they would go into the regular justice process with the tag that they were uncooperative with CJF.

One of the big drawbacks of CJF is that with a sympathetic or un-trained facilitator, perpetrators could use deceitful or manipulative means to alter the consequences.  I am sure everyone has seen perps BS, produce crocodile tears or otherwise try to 'beat the rap.'  They don't call them 'con' for nothing. 

Trained facilitators are completely necessary to this prosess because it uses shame as a primary motivator.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: debbiec on March 31, 2008, 09:47:17 AM
This process seems too soft to me. We have enough trouble in Canada actually getting anything done about our criminals. As Chris said some could care less about this "PROCESS". These guys will do and say whatever it takes to get out of a prison sentence. Just seems like a waste of time and money to me trying to shame someone in to behaving themselves. In a time when so many are fed up with our system being slack and giving ridiculous sentences I think we need something with a lot more backbone than this!As a concerned citizen I certainly believe that it is time for people to be held accountable for their actions. Along with many others  I am fed up with a system that is way too  interested in making  sure that that the criminal has all his rights met while the victim seems to have less and less rights.I realize that someone who is uncooperative with CJF would  then be put into the regular court system, just another way of wasting time. Just my opinion.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on April 01, 2008, 02:11:06 AM
Trained facilitators are completely necessary to this prosess because it uses shame as a primary motivator.

Yes this process would be especially useful for young people who have a chance at changing there lives much more then seasoned cons. I have always felt that for young folks who get busted doing relatively minor things, it would be better of that person was sentenced to some sort of diversion program where they can listen to and talk with victims of crime.

We can bring out the good in those people before they harden.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on April 01, 2008, 02:13:25 AM
For anything that is a felony or inlcudes violence or sex crimes or weapons offences, I agree with that. But for shop lifting, drug possesion, etc, and when they are young, there is still a chance. I see nothing wrong with a long sentence and getting help at teh same time for anyone else. Rehab does not require soft short prison sentences.

This process seems too soft to me. We have enough trouble in Canada actually getting anything done about our criminals. As Chris said some could care less about this "PROCESS". These guys will do and say whatever it takes to get out of a prison sentence. Just seems like a waste of time and money to me trying to shame someone in to behaving themselves. In a time when so many are fed up with our system being slack and giving ridiculous sentences I think we need something with a lot more backbone than this!As a concerned citizen I certainly believe that it is time for people to be held accountable for their actions. Along with many others  I am fed up with a system that is way too  interested in making  sure that that the criminal has all his rights met while the victim seems to have less and less rights.I realize that someone who is uncooperative with CJF would  then be put into the regular court system, just another way of wasting time. Just my opinion.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on April 01, 2008, 07:56:18 AM
One of the fundamental problems now is that prisoners can refuse rehabilitation and choose to serve their sentence out and 'pay their debt to society.'  Their refusal of rehabilitation processes could affect when they get out, but good behavior also counts towards early release.  Well, you put a guy in protective custody, remove the source of his criminal activity and he is bound to have "good" behavior.  But good behavior in prison does not guarantee good behaviour when released does it?

CJF was tried on a sexual assault case on a reserve in Manitoba and raised some controversy - mainly because the pulic perception was that the perpetrator was getting off lightly for his crime.  However, I am guessing that is has been used since to varying results.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: seeker2 on July 02, 2008, 08:32:03 PM
 I still maintain that in order to get so called "Justice." we have to bring back capital Punishment..
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: seeker2 on July 02, 2008, 08:42:46 PM
ahemm.. The feds dont want to put any more money into rehabilitation as Harper  (a few years ago announced that feels that it is is a waste of time and fed money  trying to rehabilitate a criminal.... !!
Thereby they " give them least amount of time in Max, the bang!  Down to medium for a short  time.! ( hey he wants to keep it  cheap) then mimimal security.... THEN  THEY ARE BACK (on parole) ON THE STREET WITHIN NO TIME..WE NEED CALIFORNIA CHAIN GANG WORK AS APPARENTLY THESE PSYCHO'S DONT HAVE TO WORK UNLESS" THEY WANT TO"..
 I feel that they should not get fed unless they work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?
Hey 3-squares a day what more can they ask?  They arent use to working! They are  losers!

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: seeker2 on July 02, 2008, 08:52:45 PM
  VERY GOOD good idea is to have a criminal rent next door... or BETTER YET. :)  IN  THE JUDGES BASEMENT SUITE!!

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: capeheart on July 02, 2008, 10:19:34 PM
I agree with the CPunishment being reinstated. I feel that anyone who takes a life, especially in a crime involving sex crimes against children, I would like to pull the switch. Not enough is being done to keep these bastards in jail. Things are getting a bit better in relation to getting them caught on the internet. Hats off to them for catching the guy over in Thailand from BC, that was a good catch. Well let us all pray that he gets the 20 years he may get and rot in jail over there. Slime is what he is, makes me sick to my stomach when I see his face on TV.  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on July 04, 2008, 09:53:49 AM
It makes me sick to that some judges, seem more interested in making new precedent then dispensing justice. It seems handing out very short sentences is the way they get noteriety amung peers.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: capeheart on July 24, 2008, 01:04:03 PM
Well we are getting a bit of justice in our area the Cape Breton area has in the city of Sydney closed down another known drug house. There was a standoff on Wednesday morning at 6:00, when most people are just getting up for work, they had all the police there and tazered the individual and had to throw tear gas in the home, big stuff for Sydney, just like Toronto or Edmonton. Within 24 hours after they put the new law that is in effect here about drug houses and evicted the persons and boarded it up, just like that. It is great that they were successful in getting that law here before we are overrun with those places and it just cuts it off at the pass. Congrats to our police force and our men in blue, give them credit because I know they had something to do with getting this put in place with the CBRM.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Adrian on July 24, 2008, 02:44:53 PM

It really irks me, when the cops, do good work on arresting someone, especially if dangerous, such as murder, or sex offences, and the perps get away with almost zilch, or zilch!!

Why aren't some Judges in tune to what is happening, and also, realize that peds don't stop.They will go back to it, and some may escalate to murder.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on July 24, 2008, 04:46:41 PM
Sad thing is, cops can keep busting the bad guys, but I am certain some judge will feel sorry for these criminals and release them.

Canada has done so much to raise the standards of police officers in the past generation, why can't we do the same thing for judges now?
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on July 31, 2008, 11:04:42 AM
go through weeks of gruelling training, take a psych exam, a lie-detector test and be interviewed over and over again

Wouldn't it be great if our elected officals had to go thru that?
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Adrian on August 02, 2008, 01:47:34 PM

Allan Young, and Carol Strachan: Changes needed in the sex trade!

Click here to find out more!

For nearly a year-and-a-half, a very quiet war has been fought over the sex trade across Canada. Last week the battlefield shifted to right here in Edmonton.

The drama played out downtown in a highrise's private boardroom, where federal government lawyers squared off with Osgoode Hall Law School crusader Alan Young.

He's challenging the constitutionality of Criminal Code sections outlawing common bawdy houses and living off the avails of prostitution.

Young argues the current, Byzantine regime --where selling sex is legal, but the rules governing prostitution make it almost impossible to do so safely -- is actually more dangerous than if brothels were simply legal, licensed and regulated.

He began the Supreme Court application back in March 2007 and has gathered testimony and affadavits across Canada. Young admits he was a taken aback with how hard the feds are opposing him.

"They really took this very seriously," he says. "They've made a very simple case into a very complex one."

As a result, it's going to take years to get resolved.

Many of the witnesses who testified in Edmonton were actually for the Crown, including representatives of the Edmonton police and the Prostitituion Awareness and Action Foundation of Edmonton.

Among Young's chief witnesses here was Carol-Lynn Strachan, a sex-trade advocate who became a national figure when she took Edmonton city hall to court, arguing that its escort licensing bylaw, which charges escorts thousands of dollars in annual fees, meant the city was living off the avails of prostitution.

She lost the case, but claimed a moral victory for drawing public attention to the issue.

Young has made a career challenging "state authority to criminalize what is consensual."

He's fought against gambling, obscenity and drug laws he feels needlessly restrict personal freedom. His biggest claim to fame was fighting laws prohibiting medical marijuana.

Young has wanted to challenge sex-trade laws for years, but bided his time.

The time was right when, at the beginning of the decade, the Seattle area's Green River Killer was caught and the horrors of the Pickton farm began to unfold in Vancouver, drawing massive public attention to the killing fields that were street-prostitution strolls.

Since then other cases, like the Edmonton trial of prostitute killer Thomas Svekla and Project Kare's investigation of dozens of deaths and disappearances in the Edmonton area, have continued to keep media and public attention focussed on the issue.

Young's argument is that Canada's prostitution laws force too many women onto the street,where they're easy targets for unspeakable violence.

If they were working in regulated brothels, he argues, it would be far safer for them and dramatically reduce all the havoc that street prostitution wreaks on neighbourhoods.

Properly regulating brothels, Young says, would also eliminate what he refers to as "classic pimping," the violent, exploitive sugar daddy living like a leech of women's misery.

"You should legally be able to work with and for prostitutes," Young says. And if it was all legal and licensed, prostitutes would have the same protection as anyone else in a business relationship.

"The way things are right now, no sex worker can legally protect herself."

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jennyhelgren on August 16, 2008, 04:52:40 PM
It surprises me to learn that at 25 years old I seem to know more about how shitty our justice system really is. I am one of the young women that went to court against Judge David Ramsey, and believe me when I say that the justice had nothing to do with the fact that he was held accountable for his actions. When we first came forward we were urged by many to keep silent, we were told that nothing would ever come of it, and nothing would have if it wasnt for 4 very courageous girls who decided that no one was going to silence them. And it really sadens me to say that if he wasnt a judge he would have even seen bars, our system is more corrupt than most of you realize and for some of you your mind will never fully understand. Our sytem is no better than the monsters that it has created.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Baba Donya on September 11, 2008, 02:20:21 AM
I believe a good justice system can only be developed when you weed out the bad lawyers who become judges later on.

By the way, I have read alot about other justice systems, I tend to like the Laws of England, where justice began. The lawyers there too, take better care of their clients.

Anyways...besides that, I feel that our justice system needs a revamping. I believe that we need to separate our court systems, I MEAN SEPARATE. Different buildings, different judges, different lawyers.

There should be a court house for crimes.
There should be a court house for traffic infractions.
There should be a court house for family law.
There should be a court house for consumer laws.

In other words there should be a court house for each specialty of law.

Judges prerequisites are areas of expertise in the court house assigned.

For example...a judge who lawyered and specialized in oil and gas industry should not be sitting on Family Law cases.

Each judge should be held accountable for their decisions, and appeals should be more readily attained and expediated. Each judge should know that they are not 'GOD'. They are paid very well, and should be on top of all laws pertaining to their court.

Each year a judge should have a physical exam, including a psychological exam. There are judges in the court system including the Court of Queens Bench who suffer from mental illnesses, and drug and alcohol abuse. It would be the responsibility of the committees to give "Leaves of Absences" or dismiss the individual if this person is not capable of judging.

Society is becoming more and more educated. Our laws are becoming more and more in question. The people who hand down the laws are now becoming more and more absurd, because they are well aware that society is questioning their ability to handle the position of being a judge.

Revamping our judicial system will obsolete judges who are ruling unjustly, or incompetently, or trying to make a precedent to get their name in a book.

Some of these judges even hope the more precedents they make, maybe they will become one of the twelve higher court judges for Canada.

We have to remember the old saying..."You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours!" That is what our court system is now made up of.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Baba Donya on September 11, 2008, 02:27:33 AM
New Jersey reinstated the 'Death Penalty' in 1982, there has not been an execution since 1963.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Adrian on September 19, 2008, 05:22:28 PM
It is parents like this, who need a quick seratonin adjustment! They also deserve the DP.

Woman accused of killing 7-year-old Toronto girl appears in court
Canwest News Service

Friday, September 19, 2008

TORONTO - Donna Irving, one of two people facing first-degree murder charges in the death of seven-year-old Katelynn Sampson, made a brief appearance in court Friday.

Irving had custody of Katelynn while the young girl's mother, Bernice Sampson, was dealing with personal issues.

Police responded to a 911 call on Aug. 3, which claimed the girl had choked on food, but when they arrived, police found Katelynn dead with obvious signs of trauma on her body.

One officer said the nature of the girl's injuries were the worst he had seen during his 20-year career.

Warren Johnson, 46, also faces first-degree murder charges in connection with Katelynn's death.

Both Irving and Johnson originally were charged with second-degree murder, but the charges were upgraded.

Irving, 29, is scheduled to be back in court - via video - on Oct. 3 at Toronto's College Park.

She remains in police custody.
? Canwest News Service 2008

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Sue on October 03, 2008, 03:59:30 PM
AMEN seeker2, I agree with you on this one. WAKE UP CANADA OPEN YOUR EYES .
 :'( :'( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 06, 2008, 06:36:50 AM
"By the way, I have read alot about other justice systems, I tend to like the Laws of England, where justice began. "

Baba, you are kidding right?  What do you mean by, "...where justice began..." ?
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 09, 2008, 07:41:23 AM
Criminals always want to put the blame on someone else predators that prey on kids blame their own childhood problems. If a caring person was hurt as a child the last thing they would do is hurt a child when they grew up. Most criminals in this country give the judge a sob tell about what happen to them and because of this they get sympathy and they are out in less than two years to prey on on others. Its called the defense blame.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on October 10, 2008, 12:49:13 AM
My sister had a bad childhood, I know she still deals with it today. She never harmed anyone as a result and has been married for 18 years and has 4 kids. Past abuse as an excuse for violent or sex crimes is wrong. THere are people who were never abused who do this and there are people who were who don't.

I think violence and sex abuse is a choice.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 10, 2008, 06:44:57 AM
Most courts know that sex offenders will keep hurting innocent children and women after they get out of jail. They are predators that can not be reformed but! Our justice system can. Most prosecutors and judges know that child molesters and rapist will re offend but they are free none the less. If we are to stop or slow down these crimes then tougher crimes will have to be made. There was a reason that before
1970s the number was much lower and it was because the public would not tolerate repeat offenders. Even predators are afraid when they see their own kind being put away for life. 
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on October 10, 2008, 10:53:15 AM
I know I am repeating a point here, but it bears repeating. 

dcollins stated:
1970s the number was much lower and it was because the public would not tolerate repeat offenders. Even predators are afraid when they see their own kind being put away for life.
it wasn't so much longer sentences back then, that served as a deterent.  I think it was more the fact that society, even the prison population, would not tolerate child molesters and certain types of sexual predators.  If you were that kind of perv. and it got out, you were a target... whether inside or out.

The biggest problem now are the authorities and Judges who have managed to make these acts appear as an accepted social problem/illness (treatable) ...and once again, I say .... Who are these people trying to protect anyway?
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 10, 2008, 11:07:18 AM
Hey d, I do not know if you are referring to crime in general or sex crimes specifically.

"1970s the number was much lower and it was because the public would not tolerate repeat offenders"


"There has been a steady rise in crime and incarceration rates in both Canada and the United States since about 1940. This increase has occurred in conjunction with two other social developments: a large increase in the post-war youth population that has since resulted in an aging population, and a period of high economic growth and low unemployment which has given way to extended periods of economic stagnation and rising unemployment."

So there are other factors at play here, not just a societal tolerance.

In fact, the overall crime rate has been dropping since the 80's even though the number of crimes has risen.  The latter would be the effect of population increase.  The reason the above report does not reflect this is because of the timing of the samples.  But here is the data:


There is a chart on this document that shows crime rates are approaching 1970's levels.


Here is an interesting, but brief, article on sex offender recidivism:


It would be interesting to see the data for sexual crime rates tracked over the decades, but I can't find anything obvious on-line.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 10, 2008, 11:38:48 AM
So what is my point?

Well I think that society has a better chance of waging a war against sex crimes now than they did in the 1970's.

For one, because of the increase of the availability of information there are more instances of sex crimes reported.  So it may seem like there are more sex crimes, but I am betting they are relatively the same as they were back then per capita wise.

Secondly, I think victims of sex crimes are less stigmatized (and thus less likely to feel ashamed) nowadays and are therefore more likely to report sex crimes than they were back then.  There is more of a support infrastructure today than there was back then as well.

Thirdly, the ability to catch sex criminals is far more sophisticated nowadays and more likely to result in detection and convinction.

So what's the problem then?

Is it a matter of political will?  Well every politician runs on the principle that silence is approval meaning that if there is no public outcry, they do not need to 'fix' anything.  During the latest election campaign how many stories have you read from candidates saying they would personally take up the battle for increased punishment for sex offenders? Did sex offences or crime against children even make it as a question in the recent party leaders debate?  So long as it doesn't interfere, politicians will aim towards the status quo.

Is it a matter of judicial will?  Well as much as folks want to rag on judges, they can't just hand out whatever they want.  And of course, there has to be a balance.  But the Criminal Codes says that rape (the word rape was dropped from the Code in 1983 I think, but rape is rape as far as I'm concerned) is max 10 yrs, with a weapon max 14 yrs and aggaravated (causing injury) life. 

However, curiously, the minimums for aggravated and with a weapon are the same - 5 years for the first offence, 7 for the second.  The sex offence laws concerning children - that are not rape, but interference, invitation to touching, child porn, etc are much smaller sentences.

Then there are the additional handicaps placed on judges - the 2-for-1 'dead time' rules for instance where a portion of the sentence has been reduced.

So to change all this we need immediate political will and a judiciary that is not handicapped by (or handicapping of) the Criminal Code.  If we look at the recidivism rates for sexual offences my previous post - maybe the idea is to make the first offence minimum a very long sentence, minimum 10 or 15 years.  And any rape of a child 15-20 years.

That may not strike fear into a pervert, but if they are caught they are going away for a very long time.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on October 10, 2008, 12:22:27 PM
well said Shwa;  and it is twice the crime when perpetrated on a helpless child.  the whole criminal code needs revamping in this area.  ... there's something really outrageous about pouncing on children... I could actually "lose it" if I caught someone doing that.  I'm just a scrawny woman, but I think I could kill them.
It also should be taken into account that violence toward a rape victim -such as beating, knocking them out, more than one situation (an accomplice holding the victim down) and the use of rape drugs or other, to gain an advantage with a victim, is in itself, just as hanious; and makes a victim as helpless as a child in such cases.
As far as I'm concerned, such crimes dictate dangerous offender status and a long, long time under lock and key - like until they are too old to do it again.... and I'm sorry but, I think they should also be castrated or neutered.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 11, 2008, 10:07:25 AM
What I was trying to say is the death penalty has been done away with in or just before the 1970s and killing and child abuse is rising with
the laws we have today its the victims not criminals that should be afraid. If a person killed and abused a child or person and was put to death others would see and they would be more unlikely to commit such terrible crimes.   
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: debbiec on October 11, 2008, 10:23:23 AM
I agree dcollins, we absolutely need more of a deterrent for criminals. To me that means in all crime and not just in sex crimes. We could stand to take some lessons from other countries where the punishment is harsh. In our country we would probably have people up in arms if it was tried here.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on October 11, 2008, 10:39:05 AM
Anyone who has read the Clayton Miller thread knows how I feel about the Just Us system, as it stands - an it's never going to change unless we change it.  Back in the /90's, when my brother took on the corruption spanning New Waterford to Ottawa in regards to Clayton's case, one of the first things done to him was an accident "set up" where his driver's license was taken from him in hopes of "slowing him down" and "breaking his spirit" in his quest for justice - especially when he was driving to other communities in Cape Breton daily to walk with his sign (and still does today) .... well he appealled the conviction in Halifax, represented himself, and defeated them.  But it sure made us realize how convenient it would be for corrupt officials if we still had the death penalty.  I am certain that, by now, my brother would have been given it for something they would have set him up for.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 14, 2008, 06:19:55 AM
But... is the death penalty a worthwhile deterrant?

Texas has the DP and their murder rate has been steady for a decade now after a decade long peak in the late 70's.  Same with Utah and others.  Minnesota's doesn't have the DP and their murder rates have been steady for the past decade.  Same with Michigan and others.  What these stats show is that the murder rate is more or less steady whether you have the DP or not.  So even though there is no chance of recidivism if you put a convict to death, it appears that there are others ready and willing to take his/her place.

State-by-state murder rate with non-DP states highlighted:


Other data sources:

Crime stats by state:  http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/

States with/without the DP:  http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty-policy-state

(BTW - most provinces rank with the safest percentile states in the US)

You know maybe we come to a collective idea that the death penalty simply doesn't work and we decide that perhaps horrific torture does and will be an effective deterrant.  So we torture people horrifically and then in ten years look at the stats and they show that, despite the legal use of horrific torture, the murder rate is still steady.  Then what do we do?

If we are looking to assuage our anger, the DP or horrific torture is the way to go.  But that is punitive and after the fact.  It is not much of a deterrant.  What we need to do is somehow, someway keep people from killing other people. Period.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on October 14, 2008, 10:45:01 AM
ok Shwa; here's what I think .... what we are referring to are the most heinous offenses against other human being... especially those who are helpless and/or targeted for whatever reason by these types of fiends. 
I believe that crossing the line in this way, should automatically dictate the need to end their lives too - as they have done to others - either in fact or else in theory, due to the fact that they have scarred their vicim/s for life.
I simply believe the authorities are too corrupt to put the death sentence "in the hands and at their disposal" to use when the choose.
Therefore, I say the serious offenders should be "segregated for life" in every way.  (the only time the are segregated is to protect them from the general prison population who would ultimately administer home-made justice) and the idea of puplicizing their face and record, only serves to anger people.... people have to make a living and their children have a right to grow up safe and secure.... the adult caring public (thanks to government's mismanagement and abuse of the tax dollar, and elected official's personal corruption and greed) have to spend every waking moment striving for their children's, and their own personal well being and survival - they haven't got the time and energy to take on, yet another task, like being body guard for their children and themselves 24-7.  They are already giving up so much in tax dollars off the paycheck as well as every time they spend a $ of what's left after the taxman helps himself.  The public doesn't need anymore strife in his life - especially fear of dangerous offenders.
Hense the likes of which, after committing such haneous crimes, should be segregated to a designated section of the country where they can't hurt anyone but each other.  They should be behind a segregation border, and some kind of tracking device attached to them for life.  If we can put a man on the moon, we can do this for the sake of humanity.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 14, 2008, 07:09:51 PM
 With stronger and tougher laws comes stronger accountability their has to be a solid evidence and the rich can not be able to pay lawyers
to keep them from receiving the same punishment. But it starts with people joining together to change the laws so the judges do not have final say but the victims and people should be responsible.  We also have to demand more accountability from our government and make our own MLA's serve us instead of follow the leader. It takes more than words to make changes it also takes action and results.   
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 14, 2008, 09:02:36 PM
"It takes more than words to make changes it also takes action and results."

Amd it takes action at our level - the grassroots.  The best way to do that is get involved with your local party riding association and let everyone know your agenda.  I'll likely be doing this in the next few weeks.  I mean enough is enough.  Time to put up for me...
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 16, 2008, 06:22:08 PM
 Everyone is aware of our government system before laws can be change the government itself needs drastic changes when we elect
politicians they follow their leaders and then the party then the people that voted for them. If we want more accountability we have to vote for candidates that are representing their own riding first. This means that nothing will change until Canadians realize its time for change. and not just parts of government but all including senate members that sleep most of the time instead of passing crime bills that will make a difference. We deserve more and a lot people are content to feel that change is impossible and with those attitudes nothing will change. There is still time to give our children a better tomorrow and have a government that actually works for the people.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 17, 2008, 05:38:52 AM
"before laws can be change the government itself needs drastic changes"

Not necessarily.

In the mid-80's the Progressive Conservative Mulroney government was about to introduce policy that would de-index the Old Age Security pension.  This change was met with significant 'Grey Power' politics including a very large seniors demonstration on Parliament Hill.  The government changed their tune and dropped the issue.

If a significant amount of people get the same message out, many good things can be done.  The reason I suggest joining your riding association and making your agenda well known is because we are all of different political stripes.  This issue should be non-partisan and should over-power the social engineers that blindly wave policy papers behind closed doors.  Time for this issue to come out of the closet.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 17, 2008, 07:17:22 AM
 We have to many followers now what we need is the people to realize government is for them not the other way around every group wants to be leader that the  rest will follow. if we want stronger laws every politician has to be responsible. The teen suicide rate has gone up drastically in the last ten years and so has crime rate when will we learn that we are responsible for the people we elect and not join a party for the sake of popularity. 
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 17, 2008, 10:47:58 AM
Actually the crime rate in Canada is falling and has been for a number of years (see previous threads for links to the data).  I am not sure of the teen suicide rate - one of the highest in the world - but I beleive it has levelled off and may be falling too.

We don't need to join a part for popularity, nor join a popular party.  Any party will do and it would be best if people of all political stripes joined in so that all the politicians get the message.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on October 17, 2008, 10:54:18 AM
well said Shwa
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 17, 2008, 06:21:26 PM
It is minority groups that pressure the government to water down laws so that criminals have more sympathy and get off with lighter sentencing. This has always been the problem the government uses presidence  in stead of common sense and when they pass unnatural laws without consent of majority. There are groups that have pressured the laws to be changed to make it more Convenient for those who know how to manipulate and use them for their own advantage. Young people are so confused about the morals of this country. There are more immoral things happening today than the past. Young people follow groups as a way to belong and become followers that will believe what these groups are saying regardless of truth. What two consenting adults do is there responsibility but when the government changes laws to help unnatural things to happen that is ours.   Kids are killing kids  and younger kids are drug addicts or joining gangs that kill others over drugs and money there is a increase but people only want to believe what makes them comfortable. 
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 17, 2008, 09:41:40 PM
"It is minority groups that pressure the government to water down laws so that criminals have more sympathy and get off with lighter sentencing."

I hardly think so.  For the Aboriginal "minority" group they make up some 4% of the population, but account for some 20% of the prison population.  The number is astounding when you consider that most of that 20% are male.  Whatever watering down is going on, it is not in the favour of the native folks is it?

I am not sure if the rest of the prison population is proportional, but I believe it is.  However, the only other group that gets any sort of special treatment are youth and they are certainly not a minority group.  Any changes to the laws on the behalf of youth were made by adults - a representative group of the majority.

I think it is misleading to say that there are "more" immoral things happening nowadays without an acknowledgement of a few key factors - one, that the population has increased and two, that the availability of information has increased.  This means that more people know of more things done by more people.  But that does not exonerate people in the past.  I mean, I am sure I, or most anyone else on this board, could provide plenty of information about immoral and horrific crimes of the past - and that is just the stuff that is known to us now, the stuff that was reported back then and the information that made it to light to be recorded.

As has been presented elsewhere, we know the crime rate is dropping.  While that might not be a clear indicator of morals, what it does indicate is that, proportionally, more people are committing less crime - despite the news reports of gang mayhem, drugs and murders.  But if one were to take a detailed look at history one will find that youth gangs and gangs of all types have existed in urban areas since the beginning of time.

"...but people only want to believe what makes them comfortable."  I tend to agree with this, but I can also add thatsome people only want to believe out of fear and presently the government obliges them.  What I am saying is that if the grassroots get involved we can not only change that ethic of fear, but also provide a real measure of community safety through common sense awareness of the problems.

And one of those problems is releasing an out of control brute into a neighbourhood that ought to be locked up instead of making bail.  That has nothing to do with anyone's race, religion or creed or colour, but more to do with judges with very poor judgement.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Adrian on October 17, 2008, 11:22:48 PM

Excellent post Shwa!!! I wish I could speak like you.  :)

There have been gangs since time immorable, but lately we have the many prison gangs of all nationaliteis coming out of the wood work. Not to make anyone feel bad, but we got the Nazis, the skinheads, the tribal gangs, the biker gangs, kid gangs, and it should stop. The drugs are coming thru., fast and furious, and many are on the sreet to survive. There appears no law
 and order


I hardly think so.  For the Aboriginal "minority" group they make up some 4% of the population, but account for some 20% of the prison population.  The number is astounding when you consider that most of that 20% are male.  Whatever watering down is going on, it is not in the favour of the native folks is it?''
I have had my sons stopped, and id'ed, and they were told, they were using a false name" Because no F'ing Indian like you has to have a record. They even called my work.My one son has been stopped in a van repeatedly, as it was nice, and he saved for it from his job. It was only $3,000.00 dollars.

There are way too many Natives in Jail, Period. Do you actually believe that natives should have to take, killings, swarmings, and humiliation, and continue to feel good about them selves?Women, and men are being KILLED! WE have to do something, and I do believe the Creator will step in, or guide us in our ways.

I think if you done the crime, pay for it, but there is a difference in a scrap BTW friends, and deliberately killing, there is a difference.When so much racism was going on, did people suspect happy results??

What do you think? I am trying not to place the race card, but ya know, it is now a reality.I can fit in both worlds, but a native always knows their sister, and my sons turned very angry in their teen years. Big changes were made, but self esteem, is hard to get.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 18, 2008, 07:27:59 AM
 Do not misunderstand what I was saying it has to do with past and present children are victims because they do not know who they might be communicating with over the internet it has nothing to do with race and every thing to do with preventing predators from preying on unsuspecting people. If people like following groups that is up to them. AS far as aboriginals they have gotten a raw deal from government from beginning but this is not the site or place to talk about it
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on October 18, 2008, 07:49:38 AM
dcollins; I assumed by minority groups, you meant groups who were directly responsible for "the young offender's act"  for instance.... also maybe "the John Howard Society"  ...am I on the right track here?  I didn't think you meant minority races, I thought you meant minority causes.???
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on October 18, 2008, 06:30:37 PM
Yes this is what I was trying to communicate we as the people need to pressure our government into changing laws and it will take a lot of people to make them change
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on October 18, 2008, 10:34:39 PM
"it will take a lot of people to make them change"

But the problem right now is that folks who take up the cause of looking to strengthen laws or certain laws, themselves are known as a minority cause.  Most people are silent on the subject and silence means approval.  Status quo.

I don't think there is necessarily a need to confront the government in a public way.  The government can be very insular when it wants and usually the they put the bureaucracy out in front to take the brunt of the confrontation.  But hey, 100,000 people are Parliament Hill could make a difference.  But a few backbenching MP's petiting for reform could make a bigger difference.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on October 19, 2008, 03:43:05 AM
I diagree it takes a lot of people to make big changes. I think it takes a lot of people to become aware of an issue though for those changes to happen. Yes, it can happen instantly like the one Shwa used in the 80's, but it can also start small, like MADD, it took years but it has had an affect and now in Alberta if you kill someone while drunk, you go to jail no matter what.

I assume Minority group you mean special interest group.

I think most of those groups who want 'rehabilative justice' may have good intentions, but IMO those ideals are not the correct one. Although I do agree the crime rate is going down in general, no doubt gang violence and drug wars are going up. Crime rates have dropped at about the same rate the poverty rate has been dropping, so it is not very accurate to give credit to the justice system in full.

THe mistake is not recognizing there is a difference between a young guy stealing stereos and pedophiles and violent people. Lumping all these together means they all get huge breaks in the system. Justice does mean the victim needs to feel a certain measure of justice is done too, and too often, those people have to watch a man that raped them get out on bail and then either get the charges dropped or a short sentence in the name of rehabilitation or because the laws are to unbalenced to favor the criminal.

With sex crimes and violent crimes, there can be no alternative to hard time and for a long time. Sure it may not 'fix' that person, but it keeps them away from the rest of us. Those people are not likely to change so if there are rehab resources, they should be used for younger criminals who still have a chance to make something with there lives.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Maureen on January 10, 2009, 05:51:28 PM
In my opinion, one of the biggest problems with our just-us system is the judges. I believe that judges should have to run for office just like they do in the states. I seen too many cases where judges look after their buddies and these drug dealers and what ever criminals get off with a light sentence or nothing. I don't believe in capital punishment for the simple reason there is too much corruption in our system and some innocent person can be framed for a murder like Donald Marshall and David Milgaard. Picture if there had been put to death. What are they going to say then, oops. I believe the punishment should fit the crime. If a person murdered someone they should stay in prison and only come out in a box. When it is a sexual crime especially when it is a child, the criminal should be castrated and only allowed in an area that is far in the woods where there is no human contact. Try and have sex with a bear. See who is in control and who wins. I also believe that when these criminals are in prison, don't give them special treatment, put them out in the general public and see how long they last. And for the people on the outside that have evil minds, once they know this goes on in a prison they may think twice before they act.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: dcollins on April 23, 2009, 07:09:01 AM
There was a reporter that said a woman was murdered and she was a prostitute it angered me because this was no woman it was a lost little girl of fifteen that died to young. The government passes laws that are unnatural and Canada has become a hiding place for the worst criminals in the world. If we want morals and safety then our government has to start acting more practical and pass laws that actually helps stop criminals. The law as it is now the victim gets punished and criminals that are predators get a revolving door. It is time for people to go to there MLA,s and demand stronger and tougher laws to protect innocent women and children.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: waabzy on April 23, 2009, 07:16:00 AM
Its time our Justice system was set up to involve ALL people - regardless of age, race, what they did for a living. Period!
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Vlug Fietsen on May 09, 2009, 08:22:31 PM
Our Justice System... is corrupt
 ... everyone knows the RCMP are full of corruption and they have shown themselves to be thugs... the entire world sees this...  there are so many examples to choose from... one of many recent signs of corruption, as an example - Robert Dziekański Taser incident by police on Oct. 14 at Vancouver International Airport.... how it was handled shows just how Our Justice System does Not work and repeatedly fails both Canadian citizens as well as other countries. 

A name also comes to mind ... David Milgaard... lest we forget

It will always come down to... “Our Justice System” must LOOK good at all costs!
In reality there are other more obvious cover-ups by the RCMP , LOOKS comes before doing what's right... hence the reason we'll have other David Milgaards (only a different name) as I believe will come to light soon in some serious cases.

How much more obvious signs of corruption should we tolerate before forcing severe change within this so called "Justice System"

People should use more publicity to take stands against such obvious misuses of power. Many of the public here in Canada are in fear of the police and the power of the Judicial System... to me it only shows their weaknesses and must be confronted for everyone’s sake.

As far as I'm concerned If you are in need of help, with most issues you're better off and safer asking your community and neighbours then going to the police here in Canada. If one wants to count on common sense and caring people, do Not go to the System or through it to get something done that involves getting to the truth... unless you have no other choice and are forced. As I have personally suffered do to their politicals, pure incompetence, and being more concered with covering their own asses (which is all that matters to those who work within this Justice System of Canada). I have relatives and know many closely who are employed in a wide variety of areas by Our Justice System, many of them understand, some are even fearful of losing everything that they worked for, it’s simple they say. ‘If you want to make a living you fall in line’ or you will not make it...  'and keep your mouth shut...  it’s a career braking decision if you take a stand against corruption within. Tell the truth and you pay!' 

Those who are in power in "Our Justice System" their jobs are To maintain the status quo

I personally do not trust the Judicial System of Canada as they put politics before people... Canada is in fact, no better than many other countries. Wow what a surprise. It's just shocking! it can't be, not in Canada... what a joke.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on May 09, 2009, 08:46:07 PM
Well said!
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Sleuth on June 03, 2009, 07:18:27 PM
This came out two hours ago. I agree with the McLean family. People who have been found guilty should have no privacy rights. It always seems to me that the government either leans to far to the left or to far to the right. They don't know the meaning of 'middle of the road'. Maybe they will in my life time.

By Chinta Puxley, The Canadian Press

WINNIPEG - Lawyers for the family of a young man beheaded on a Greyhound bus are considering taking those determining the killer's fate to the Manitoba Court of Appeal.

Norman Boudreau and Jay Prober are criticizing the Criminal Code review board hearing for Vince Li. They allege the chairman is in a conflict of interest because his firm is representing Greyhound in pending civil lawsuits over the case.

They also argue the board has no right to withhold its ruling from the public to protect Li's privacy. Both lawyers say if the board doesn't make its entire ruling public, the family of victim Tim McLean will consider a challenge in Appeal Court.

Boudreau raised both concerns at the hearing held Monday, but board chair John Stefaniuk said the board was "disinclined" to grant him standing to pursue either issue and the matter was quickly dropped.

Boudreau alleges Stefaniuk is in a clear conflict, even though he is an environmental lawyer who isn't directly involved in the Greyhound lawsuit. As chairman, Stefaniuk would have "privileged information" about the Li case which could be shared within the firm, Boudreau said.

"Each and every individual lawyer in the firm is deemed to have the same knowledge," Boudreau said. "You cannot expect our clients to believe that there is this ... wall between the two lawyers within the firm."

"There is a legal maxim that says that justice must not only be done, it must appear to be done," Prober added. "In this case, from our client's perspective, the victim's perspective ... it doesn't appear to be done."

Li was found not criminally responsible for killing McLean in front of horrified passengers near Portage la Prairie, Man., last summer. A judge ruled in March that Li suffered from untreated schizophrenia and did not realize that killing the 22-year-old carnival worker was wrong.

The review board must decide whether Li should remain in a mental hospital, be given a conditional release or granted an absolute discharge. A ruling is expected later this week.

Stefaniuk said it would be inappropriate to comment on the conflict allegations. The concerns raised by the McLean family will be addressed "by the review board in its reasons for decision," he said in an email.

But those reasons aren't likely to be made public out of concern for Li's privacy rights.

"Once the reasons are issued, as with a decision of the courts, they will speak for themselves," Stefaniuk said.

The McLean family's defence lawyers did "not establish to the satisfaction of the board" that they deserved standing at the hearing, he added.

Those who had standing - Li's lawyers and the Crown - were asked if the chairman should excuse himself and "each confirmed to the board that there was no issue," Stefaniuk said.

Review board proceedings as they relate to Li have been dogged by controversy. Stefaniuk initially said the board couldn't release its ruling because that would violate Li's right to privacy as a patient. The board's decision would only be released to Li, the Crown and the hospital responsible for Li's care, he said.

After an outcry, Stefaniuk said the board was re-evaluating its legal advice and would probably release "basic information" about the decision, but not detailed reasons. The McLean family would also receive a copy of the board's decision, he conceded.

But that hasn't addressed the concerns of McLean's family, the defence lawyers said.

Greyhound is being sued by both the McLean family and bus passengers who claim the bus line didn't ensure passenger safety. Prober, who is representing the plaintiffs, says he will move for Stefaniuk's law firm to be removed from the case once the civil suit gets to court.

In the meantime, the family will fight to ensure all details of Li's fate are made public, as they are in provinces such as Ontario and British Columbia, Prober said.

"We don't want half the story. We want the whole story. In this situation, the interests of the victims and the public should trump the issues of the accused person."
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: capeheart on June 04, 2009, 03:49:47 PM
Sleuth, I agree, I already commented on Li's thred, but what in the heck are we coddling and protecting these animals for. He had a mental problem, well why should he have an privacy. He chose to murder someone in cold blood, that even if Stephen King was to write a novel he wouldn't be able to come up with it. There should be absolutely nothing kept secret about this man, no privacy whatsoever. And he should be treated as a sex offender, if he is ever released his picture should be posted and he should be registered. Like I said, the person that ever releases this monster and signs the paper should have to have him come live with them. And I said on the site, I wonder how much sleep they would get at night. ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Edsonmom on July 16, 2009, 12:26:21 AM
I found this very interesting, and I would love to hear eveyones thoughts on it..

System more like pizza special than justice
Email Print Letter to Editor  Share

Published: July 14, 2009 7:00 PM
Updated: July 15, 2009 9:24 AM

This is the going rate for criminals when sentenced; get credit for twice your time served.

How about “Two for One” for assault? How about for robbery? Kidnapping?

Robert Wingie of McBride, BC, received an 18-month sentence in an Alberta court for kidnapping a seven-year-old girl. He got in on the “Two for One” sale for the nine months already spent in jail.

Crown prosecutor John Higgerty said there is no reason to believe Wingie will re-offend. Really?

That differs considerably from noted British Columbian child psychologist Dr. Michael Catchpole’s position on pedophiles. Catchpole believes these offenders can not be rehabilitated.

In the victim’s impact statement, read in court, the child’s dad said, “I could not protect my daughter from this and I feel like I let her down. Since the day of the kidnapping there has been a sadness in her that hasn’t left.”

Will Victoria Stafford’s killers be treated similarly by the justice system?

Ivan Henry, 60, was found guilty of rape and assault in 1983 and was released this year into a North Vancouver neighbourhood. He had a previous record of attempted rape and was declared a dangerous offender. CBC said the parole board categorized Henry “as an untreated, violent sexual offender who was at a high risk to re-offend.”

You think “Two for One” is outrageous? How about “Three for One”?

Curtis Vidal, 28, was acquitted last year on charges of assault, robbery, unlawful confinement, extortion and possession of a weapon. Victims and witnesses found their memory failed and were unable to support the prosecution.

Vidal was previously convicted in 2006 of assaulting an Agassiz couple. In July ‘07 he shot up an SUV with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun, lead police on a high-speed chase terminating when an apartment building wouldn’t move. Oddly, he escaped — but was arrested the next day. In August ‘02 he received a lifetime ban from possessing firearms.

Vidal was convicted on May 8 and will be sentenced in August. He was asking the court to grant him three for one time, meaning he wanted each day already spent in jail to count as three days. Vidal told the court that he’d been isolated from human contact during his current prison time in a small cell with dim lighting, a broken shower, cold meals and no access to the library, television or computers.

Vidal’s defence attorney announced recently that Vidal has abandoned his request for triple time.

But the sad part for law abiding citizens is that the Crown is asking for only a six-year sentence.

RCW has requested clarification from MP Cathy McLeod. We understood there is current legislation making 10 years a minimum sentence for any firearms-related crime.

Big thanks

RCW extend sincere appreciation to former CRD Director Maureen Pinkney and current directors Al Richmond, Art Dumaresq and Bruce Rattray and the CRD for their financial support of our successful crime prevention program.

We also extend our appreciation to Peter and Betty Lunn and their exceptional staff for their work and support.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Shwa on July 17, 2009, 05:31:06 AM
Here's what I think.  Let's start with this news story about a local creep that was recently apprehended by police for yet another violent incident against a woman in his long "career" of incidents.


I know that the CPC is going to introduce legislation to get rid of 2-4-1 time or dead time or whatever you want to call it.  Fair enough.

But that isn't really the problem - the problem is short sentencing time.  I feel that should this continue and should the trend keep marching towards even shorter sentences for violent crimes - esp. against women and children - that vigilante justice will become viable.

That is the last thing this society wants.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on July 20, 2009, 10:11:31 PM
Dr. Michael Catchpole’s position on pedophiles. Catchpole believes these offenders can not be rehabilitated

Why doesn't anyone listen to this man.... he knows more then a judge would about this.

I agree with Shaw about these sentences. Violent people and sex offenders need to have stronger sentences. Let's clear space in jali by making petty offences served in other ways like 1 week in a work camp or something.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Randyman on July 30, 2009, 08:55:13 AM
Thanks for the forum Chris!!!   Down here in the litigious States of America lol,,
our judicial system is far from perfect. We have released many pedos only to have them re-offend within weeks of their parole. We have had a few judges put multiple offenders on the street with (get this) probation.
   I think Maryland has it right. There is absolutely no evidence that these people can be rehabilitated. This should be the number one reason in favor of life in prison. There can be no doubt that the pedophile only escalates as time goes by. Eventually they will kill if not stopped.
   Actually, I am in favor of the death penalty for multiple offenders. Next to murder, child rape is, in my opinion, the worst crime committed against people.
And before anyone uses the word deterrent, I do not believe the death penalty is a deterrent, it is a penalty. I think the people who commit serial murders, mass murders, spree killings, and pedophilia are not just candidates for the DP, but are winners of first prize and should not be allowed to appeal their case for 20 years looking for a typo to release them. Russia gives these types a trial and if found guilty they are immediately taken out and shot. At least they have that right.
Thanks again Chris................Randyman
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Chris on July 31, 2009, 04:17:41 PM
Hey randyman, thanks for joining! It is my pleasure.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: solvy on October 24, 2009, 11:35:55 PM
Just a little more of the same old thing!!!  They can't even keep their own house in order, how can we expect them to clean up murders & missing people cases?

Peter Lepine was sworn in as West Vancouver's new police chief Saturday. Oct. 24, 2009. (CTV)

Peter Lepine was sworn in as West Vancouver's new police chief Saturday. Oct. 24, 2009. (CTV)
New West Vancouver police chief sworn in

Updated: Sat Oct. 24 2009 18:10:38


Peter Lepine, a 30-year veteran with the RCMP, was sworn in Saturday as the chief constable of the West Vancouver Police Department.

He's the district's third police chief in three years.

In a speech following his swearing in, Lepine said not all public safety issues are policing issues and vowed to work with community, corporate and volunteer organizations.

He told officers that he would not stand in their way if they had new ideas.

"As Mahatma Ghandi would often say, 'There go my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader.' As your chief, there are times when I need to stand clear out of your way so that you can have the freedom to try new ideas that potentially could be the next big strategy," he said.

Mayor Pamela Goldsmith-Jones praised Lepine's dedication to reaching out to the community and approach to policing.

"He doesn't believe every problem is a policing problem," she said.

Department troubles

Lepine is taking over a department that has, at times, been dogged by controversy.

In 2006, Scott Armstrong was fired as chief after admitting that officers held drinking parties at the station.

Const. Lisa Alford was convicted of impaired driving after one get-together.

Sgt. Doug Bruce and Insp. Bob Fontaine were accused of mishandling the internal investigation into Alford's case. The two took medical leave.

Their disciplinary hearings were cancelled after they retired in 2008.

Bruce and Fontaine complained that they were unfairly targeted by then-Chief Kash Heed, who was hired to clean up the department. Heed is now B.C.'s solicitor general.

Lepine told CTV News Saturday that incidents like these are not unique to West Vancouver and exist in other departments, too.

"I think my philosophy is to put the past in the past, to focus on the future," he said.

But the trouble doesn't seem to be over.

B.C.'s police complaint commissioner is investigating Const. Mike Bruce. He's accused of forging a signature on a photo lineup during a robbery investigation.

Earlier this year, one officer was suspended for three days after he failed to attend a noise complaint at a Future Shop and then wrote a false report.

The officer lied when confronted about it. He later confessed when his police cruiser's Global Positioning System was analyzed.

"I will treat every case on its own merits, and I'll get the counsel of those who have experience in those areas to help me deal with any matters if they should happen like that in the future," Lepine said.

Lepine was raised in Quebec and joined the RCMP in 1980.

He has served on both coasts and was most recently commander of the Coquitlam detachment of the RCMP.

His wife, Lori, is a 17-year veteran of the RCMP.

With a report from CTV British Columbia's Lisa Rossington

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jellybean on August 26, 2010, 05:59:18 PM
One day I will sit down at my computer, and bring up the injustices done.  It is enough to make your hair curl. Even most recent decisions by all of the courts. These are for horrendous crimes, 5 years, 6 years, oh but we have time served, so even less than that. Who says murder, raping, etc. doesn't pay?
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: MABOU on February 27, 2011, 01:22:40 AM
I hope this is the right form to ask this question? I was wanting to know if someone was convicted of 1st degree murder and sentenced to life with no chance of parole for 25 years in 1997 when would he qualify for p-arole?? the murder took place in Hamilton, Ontario in 1995 so  he was in custody approx.2 yrs before conviction. Also this was his 1st charge and he was i think 24 yrs old. Iheard prison years are calculated differently, is this so?? anyone know??????
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Concerned on February 27, 2011, 07:34:01 AM
MABOU, in general a first degree murder offense carries a mandatory sentence of  "life imprisonment" with a parole ineligibility period of 25 years, but where the offender has been convicted of a single murder, they may have their parole ineligibility period reduced to no less than 15 years under the "Faint Hope Clause."  There is no guarantee, though, that the National Parole Board will grant the reduction, as they need to determine if an offender still poses a risk to society.

"Life imprisonment" does not really mean "life" as we would think.  Perhaps it should be renamed to just "imprisonment of 25 years, with lots of chances to get out early" sentence.  As parole sometimes means review every two years after eligibility of parole comes into effect. This is highly reliant on the family reliving the horrible situation every two years to try to keep the person in prison for the full sentence. Sometimes, in my opinion, the sentence is harder on the family giving all the hope to the perpetrator through the years, and all the grief, reliving the grief, and perpetual fear to the victim and their family. I've often wondered why we have procedures that hurt the good and protect those that have done great harm. How that affects prevention. How that attracts criminal elements. How, in the end, that harms the ability to have safe communities.

I have found these resources helpful:

Faint Hope Clause:

Criminal Code of Canada

Though the government provides this on their site (admittedly, I have not found this too indepth): 

Life Sentences and Section 745.6 of the Criminal Code:



Couldn't find the Faint Hope Clause on their site.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: solvy on April 05, 2011, 11:12:13 PM
Not sure if this is the right thread for this , if not could mods move it please.

I found this rather interesting and am still wondering who XY is?


Tracey Tyler Legal Affairs Reporter

The first thing you notice about a judgment released by the Ontario Court of Appeal on Monday is the word “WARNING”, followed by bold, black type explaining the court file in the case has been sealed.

Deleted from its usual place on the cover page of the ruling is the name of the trial judge in the case, along with the date that judge imposed a criminal conviction on a person known only as “X.Y.”

The secrecy was the appeal court’s attempt to do everything in its power to protect the identity of a confidential police informer.

Somewhere in Ontario, however, Crown prosecutors and a police department didn’t take the same precautions and now they are paying the price.

In its 3-0 decision Monday, the appeal court quashed the conviction and ordered X.Y. released from custody because prosecutors and police released evidence exposing X.Y.’s informer status.

“To characterize the police and prosecutorial conduct in breach of the informer privilege as anything less than gross negligence is to ignore reality,” justices Eileen Gillese, Susan Lang and David Watt said in a decision whose authorship is attributed only to “The Court.”

Confidential informer privilege is “sacrosanct,” they said, essential for protecting informers from harm and signalling to prospective informers their identities will be shielded.

After word leaked out, X.Y. was labelled a “rat” and attacked in jail.

It is only in the rarest of cases, the appeal panel said, that a conviction will be quashed because of conduct by police and prosecutors amounting to an abuse of process.

But the court found that’s what happened after X.Y. was arrested and interviewed.

After some initial questions, X.Y. asked that the recording device be switched off. An officer left the room and turned off a master recording system, but a secondary system continued to roll. Believing the interview was no longer being taped, X.Y. began discussing his work as an informer and named the officer who was his police handler.

After assuring X.Y. their discussion had not been taped, the interviewing officer arranged for a secretary to transcribe the recording. He turned the transcript over to the Crown without making any effort to first confirm X.Y.’s status as an informer and whether any steps should be taken to protect X.Y.’s identity.

Prosecutors also asked no questions, handing electronic and hard copies of the interview over to defence counsel as part of their disclosure.

“Not one but two state agencies, each under a duty to protect informer privilege, defaulted on their obligations,” the appeal court said Monday.

The trial judge rejected a defence application to stay the charge because exposing X.Y.’s informer status was an abuse of process. The mistake was unintentional, the judge said, and the Crown had tried to repair the damage by taking back the evidence and promising that if X.Y. testified, the jury would not hear about X.Y.’s work as an informer.

The trial judge failed to consider the bigger picture, said the appeal court.

“In this case, the trial judge had evidence of retribution, actual and promised,” the court said. “Official conduct such as occurred here could have a significant impact on future disclosures by current and prospective informers to the detriment of the administration of justice.”
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jellybean on October 20, 2011, 02:34:22 PM
What was this murderer doing being allowed out on day Pass to visit his parents?/jb

Inmate on day pass takes officer hostage

 By Clara Ho, Calgary Herald; Postmedia News October 20, 2011
An inmate serving time for the execution-style slaying of a nine year-old boy was arrested Tuesday evening after allegedly holding a female corrections officer hostage while she was escorting him back to the Drumheller Institution.

Around 6: 12 p.m., Donald Junior Fowler, 32, was returning to the penitentiary following a day pass to visit family in Buck Lake, about 270 kilometres northwest of Calgary, when he pretended to be sick on Highway 42 west of Highway 21, said Sgt. Joe Sangster with Three Hills RCMP.

The inmate, who wasn't handcuffed or secured while sitting in the front passenger seat, then overpowered the lone corrections officer by choking her with his hands and a seatbelt and tied her up in the back seat of the 2009 Dodge Caravan, Sangster said.

He reportedly took the wheel, continuing south on back roads to Highway 587 and Range Road 252, where he dropped off the officer. She called 911 using her cellphone.

Officers from neighbouring detachments started heading toward the area, "closing the nets" on the suspect, Sangster said.

Shortly after 7 p.m., a constable from the Olds RCMP spotted the van on Highway 587 near Range Road 272 and pulled in behind the vehicle. The inmate stopped, got out and complied with all of the officer's demands, Sangster said, adding the man was arrested without incident.

The corrections officer was taken to Three Hills hospital with minor injuries, and was later released.

"Physically, she had minor bruising and scrapes, abrasions. On the other side, the mental issue, I think she's going to be dealing with this for a while," Sangster said.

Fowler has been charged with escaping lawful custody, assault of a peace officer, kidnapping, forcible confinement, theft of a motor vehicle and dangerous driving.

He is expected to appear in court on Friday.

He is currently serving a life sentence for the second-degree murder of nine-year-old Sean Pye-Clark in 1995.

Fowler, 15 at the time, was invited to live in the Alder Flats home of Lloyd and Dawn Clark, who often took in troubled teens as a way to give back to the community.

Fowler had only been in the home three weeks when he stabbed and shot Sean, the couple's nephew, at close range.

Dawn Bancroft, spokeswoman with the Correctional Service of Canada, said escorted temporary absences are granted for different reasons, from medical appointments to family visits.

She declined to give details on why Fowler was unsecured and escorted by a single officer on his day pass.

"Based on their security level, there are certain policies and practices in place mandated by policies as to how escort goes out. And at Drumheller, escorts are facilitated exactly according to policy," she said.

She said this incident is being investigated.

"We work to ensure these things don't happen and continuously evaluate practices and policies, which is being done again in this case. That's our commitment to ensure the safety of all involved."

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: MABOU on November 25, 2011, 07:38:59 AM
I just realized upon reading this story about Fowler that this person has been in prison since he was 15!!! years old!!! I didn't think we gave life sentences to 15 year olds! I knew we bumped up 16 and 17 yr olds up to adult status for murder but not 15 yr olds. This kid had NO life but what he learned at the hands of criminals in prison so he probably is institutionalized and never wants to get out. I wouldn't doubt thats why he did this break away , to ensure he doesn't get out anytime soon.  If he ever got out what skills would he have to survive on the outside. I wouldn't want him released to my neighbourhood!
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Dulsebunny on February 06, 2012, 08:52:21 AM
I didn't quite know where to put this and if this thread is not the place for it I apologize.
I have to wonder just what rock our PM has been living under.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Nish on February 06, 2012, 09:04:57 AM
You do realize that the Prime Minister likely had very little to do with the actual penning of the bill, right?

What I believe to have happened:

Several Conservative driven initiatives were present for the crime bill. A tough stance on drugs is obvious, considering party platform and previous workings. I do not think it's the case of the Cons saying that having 201 pot plants, or whatever that number is, would be somehow less of an offence than sexual assault on a child. Rather, I believe it very likely that only parts of the bill were worked on individually and then, highly likely, a bit of time lapsed before getting from the pot thing to the pedophile thing.

Trust me, if you're wanting a tougher stance on criminals then Harper is most certainly not the enemy.

Personally, I am a bit on the fence about the bill. I believe we do need mandatory minimums for certain crimes and anything to do with sexual assault, crimes against children, or drugs certainly fit the bill to me. But it isn't a measuring contest....

However, this isn't over, and anxiously await someone from the Cons to insert their foot directly into their mouth over this. Ain't politics grand?

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jobo on October 26, 2012, 04:48:43 AM

|Oct 24, 2012 - 5:44 PM

•Opening statement in Hale trial Tuesday

 (LINDSAY) “You may have got everything, but you’ll be dead and I’ll be out in seven years.”

 These are the words that Brenda Green testified she heard Jack Hale say to his estranged wife Yvonne Leroux,  while raising a gun in his hands, minutes before she was shot in the head Sept. 18, 2008 at Riverwood Park trailer park near Lindsay.
 Ms Green testified via video from another location in the Lindsay courthouse Wednesday (Oct. 24).
 She told the court she had met Mr. Hale and his wife Yvonne through her common-law husband, Tom Bannister, who worked with Mr. Hale at General Motors and that the couples socialized on occasion. She testified that since the couple separated, she still stayed friends with both Mr. Hale and Ms Leroux, but only socialized with them separately.
 Ms Green told the jury she and Mr. Bannister had been invited to the trailer by Yvonne and arrived the previous day and both couples had attended the Lindsay Fair.
 The next morning, as the two women were sitting at the table drinking coffee, she told the court she saw Mr. Hale come around the corner of the trailer, and enter. She testified that she was looking at Mr. Hale’s face and did not see the gun at first, and even after she had seen the gun, she told Crown attorney Rebecca Griffin she couldn’t describe it beyond demonstrating that it was about two and half feet in length.
 Some details seemed to be difficult to get out of the witness, including Mr. Hale’s specific body position as he spoke to the women as well as where exactly the gun was pointed when he was talking. During her chief testimony, Ms Green said that Mr. Hale wasn’t facing the women straight on and while she couldn’t say which way the gun was pointed, she did say it wasn’t aimed directly at Ms Leroux or herself and that she was looking at the barrel of the gun. Later in her testimony, the Crown asked her to review parts of the transcript of her original statement to police the day of the shooting to refresh her memory after which time Ms Green said she remembered that Mr. Hale had pointed the gun at Ms Leroux when he raised it and pumped it, as well as remembering Ms Leroux say “No, Jack, please,” at some point in the conversation, although she couldn’t pinpoint exactly when.
 During defence lawyer Tom Balka’s intense cross-examination however, Ms Green admitted that she had no current memories of the above details contained within her original police statement.
 She testified that she twice tried to get up and leave to get Mr. Bannister, because she thought he could talk Mr. Hale out of shooting Yvonne, but was refused by Mr. Hale. She testified that Mr. Hale did allow her to go to the bathroom and once she was in the bathroom with the door shut behind her, she said she heard a bang.
 Mr. Balka’s cross-examination focused on several areas in which Ms Green’s testimony varied from what she said during a preliminary hearing, such as the length of time she was in the bathroom and whether or not she actually sat down when Mr. Hale told her to, before going to the bathroom.
 Ms Green grew very frustrated, several times raising her voice to Mr. Balka, at times asking “How the heck would I know?” and “How many times do I have to say this stuff?”
 She also told the defence attorney she was confused at several times during cross-examination when he was asking her about specific time frames before and throughout the incident. Mr. Balka also asked her about further conversation between Mr. Hale and Ms Leroux before the shooting and the tone of the conversation. Ms Green replied that she didn’t remember any other conversation except Ms Leroux telling Mr. Hale “All I wanted was my grandchildren’s things and my stuff,” and that neither party was yelling.
 She admitted that she may have missed or forgotten some of the conversation due to the trauma of the situation.
 “I was, putting it blankly, scared shitless.”
 But when Mr. Balka suggested that maybe she had misheard Mr. Hale saying “you’ll be dead,” Ms Green was adamant that she had heard him say that.
 “That is so embedded in my mind, nobody’s going to take that away from me,” she testified, although at one point she did admit that she didn’t really believe Mr. Hale was going to shoot her or Yvonne.
 “I can’t get that out of my head.”
 Ms Griffin rose multiple times to object in a short time period to Mr. Balka’s line of questioning, saying that it was inviting hearsay and the jury was asked to leave the courtroom twice while the legal aspect of the argument was discussed.
 Mr. Balka also asked Ms Green several times about where the party’s four dogs were and took particular interest in where Lady, a Pitt Bull, was and if she had a particular affinity for Ms Leroux and tended to sit by her leg.
 “Lady would sit next to anybody,” Ms Green testified, later expanding in the Crown re-examination that “she’s a great big suck.”
 Back in her chief testimony, Ms Green said once she heard the patio door slam, Ms Green testified that she came out of the bathroom, had to step over her dead friend, and went to get Mr. Bannister who was walking their dog by the beach. She testified that when she came out of the bathroom, Dirk Arsenault, was also coming out of the back room where he had been laying down and they both went to get Mr. Bannister before Mr. Arsenault called 911.
 She testified that other than telling her common-law husband “Jack shot Yvonne,” the three did not discuss the incident further before police arrived, which was quickly.
 At several points in her testimony, Ms Green seemed to be getting frustrated, saying she couldn’t remember or help with more details.
 “It was four years ago. I’ve been trying to forget about what happened and not live with it forever.”
 The day began wrapping up the crown’s re-examination of Constable Brendan Johnston of Kawartha Lakes Police, who testified that a clearer zoom of a particular crime scene photo was not possible. Ms Griffin noted that she would come back to the issue later in the trial when another witness took the stand.

Four years after Yvonne's murder....her ex is finally on the stand, but he only expects to get 7 years in jail.  This is upsetting.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jobo on October 31, 2012, 04:12:03 PM

By The Canadian Press, cbc.ca, Updated: October-31-12 1:25 PM
Mother of prison cell murder victim demands justice

The distraught mother of a prison inmate murdered by a calculating serial killer in their shared cell told a coroner's jury on Tuesday the officials who bunked her son with the convict should be fired.

"I keep asking myself and believe so should everyone else how [corrections] and their staff could put something so evil as Michael Wayne McGray in the same cell with my son or any other human being," said a tearful Lela Phillips.

"I would expect whoever did this has lost their jobs, not just transferred to another jail where they could do the same thing again," Phillips said in a strained voice.

Jeremy Phillips, 33, was found dead in his cell at the medium-security Mountain Institute in Agassiz, B.C., in November 2010, about one week after he was put in the same cell as McGray.

The 45-year-old McGray was serving a life sentence for six murders, while Phillips, from Nova Scotia, was incarcerated on a six-year sentence for aggravated assault.

The coroner's jury can't find fault in Phillips' death, instead its members are tasked with examining the safety of inmates in the prison system by making recommendations towards preventing similar deaths in the future.

They began deliberations on Tuesday afternoon.

During the day's proceedings, the three men and two women heard that federal corrections officers who assessed the violent killer before transferring him from B.C.'s only high-security prison believed the man was repentant.

An assistant warden at Mountain Institute explained the rationale behind the move, and why McGray was paired with Phillips.

"He indicated he was committed to his correctional plan ... He was performing very well," Brenda Lamm said.

"I believe he was making a sincere effort. I don't believe that he manipulated the staff."

McGray confessed to police that he bound Phillips with bedsheets and stuffed a sock in the willing man's mouth as part of an elaborate hostage-taking ruse they concocted together.

But McGray admitted that he had planned to turn on Phillips all along, gratifying his own murderous urges.

McGray pleaded guilty to first-degree murder a year later, was handed another life sentence and placed in another maximum-security prison.

Phillip's family filed a lawsuit against Correction Services of Canada for his death last year.

With files from the CBC’s Jason Proctor
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jobo on November 02, 2012, 06:54:38 AM

By CBC News, cbc.ca, Updated: November-02-12 8:01 AM
Government won't interfere in Ashley Smith inquest, Harper says

Even though Prime Minister Stephen Harper concedes the treatment of Ashley Smith while in custody was "unacceptable," he says his government is not in a position to interfere with the coroner’s inquest called to look into the New Brunswick teen’s death.

Harper said he would let the arguments between lawyers about the inquest's focus play out without interference.

Smith died five years ago at the Grand Valley Institution for Women in Kitchener, Ont., where she choked herself to death while prison guards — who were told not to intervene — watched from outside her cell.

Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae asked the prime minister during question period in the House of Commons on Thursday why the government is continuing to try to limit the scope of the inquest.
"The federal government has consistently taken the position that the jurisdiction of the coroner has to be restricted … and I'd like to ask the prime minister why this is happening," Rae said.

Harper responded that the Smith case is "a terrible tragedy" and said information that has come to light shows corrections officials acted in an "unacceptable" way. He said his government will look at whether additional investments need to be made in the "mental-health aspects of our correctional policies."

Corrections Canada fought the release of the videos showing troubling treatment of the teen from Moncton. The videos were made public Wednesday. One shows Smith being duct-taped to her seat on a plane while being transferred from an institution in Saskatchewan to one in Quebec. Another shows her being held down by a guard in full riot gear while she was injected against her will with a tranquillizer.

Corrections officials do not want the jury at the coroner’s inquest — scheduled to begin in front of a jury in January — to see the videos, arguing that the Ontario coroner has no jurisdiction to delve into the federal prison system.

Smith was first incarcerated at the age of 15 after an incident where she threw crab apples at a postal worker. She was convicted of multiple charges of breach of probation, common assault, trespassing and causing a disturbance.

She racked up six years worth of additional time behind bars for infractions while in youth custody — so many that she eventually ended up serving time in the federal adult prison system.

During the year she spent in federal custody, Smith was transferred 17 times between nine institutions in five provinces.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said he has asked corrections officials to co-operate with the inquest, even though lawyers for Corrections Canada and three doctors involved in Smith’s treatment in prison will continue to argue that only the time spent at Grand Valley Institution should be considered.

The hearing on those arguments will resume on Nov. 13.

The release of the videos has renewed calls to keep the mentally ill out of prisons.

Kim Pate, head of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, said the videos show the treatment Smith received behind bars was abominable, and added that so is what Corrections Canada is doing now by trying to prevent the public from knowing about it.

“The fact that they are spending millions and millions of dollars defending their own actions and trying to hide what actually happened, I think is unconscionable,” Pate said.

“The Canadian public should be outraged.”

Toronto psychiatrist Dr. Irvin Wolkoff said the alternatives to prison are limited for the mentally ill. Prisons become a default for the most difficult cases, he said.

“The trouble is, people like that are at some point too bothersome for society at large, and they stop being of clinical interest,” said Wolkoff.

Family releases documents

Also Thursday, Smith's family released documents their lawyer said showed a "shoddy" criminal investigation into how prison authorities in Quebec had treated Smith.

"When Ashley was alive, the system turned a blind eye to her and ultimately, she was abused right into death," lawyer Julian Falconer said.

The probe followed a plea her family made to the RCMP, saying that Smith had been restrained and given anti-psychotic and other drugs against her will without any legal or medical justification.

The RCMP, claiming it had no jurisdiction, passed the complaint to Quebec provincial police, and three incidents that took place in July 2007 at the federally run Joliette prison in Montreal were investigated.

The provincial police report found authorities used force on Smith "when she behaved contrary to regulation."

While there may have been "deviations from internal procedure," they were minor, no excessive force was used, and the actions did not amount to anything criminal, the investigator concluded.

As to whether the use of sedatives was an abuse, a report by a psychiatrist, Dr. Beaudry, prepared for the correctional investigator, concluded there was no imminent risk to Smith's health or the safety of others.

Falconer called the Quebec police probe "embarrassingly shoddy." He noted police did not even look at Smith's medical file.

With files from CBC's Maureen Brosnahan and The Canadian Press
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: SAP on November 02, 2012, 09:41:02 AM
Harper responded that the Smith case is "a terrible tragedy" and said information that has come to light shows corrections officials acted in an "unacceptable" way. He said his government will look at whether additional investments need to be made in the "mental-health aspects of our correctional policies."

Why haven't they done that long ago? They "will look at" ... there have been many tragedies b/c of misdiagnosing etc. over many years and just now deciding to look into it. I am at a loss for words ... well not really but I can't post how I really feel.

"When Ashley was alive, the system turned a blind eye to her and ultimately, she was abused right into death," lawyer Julian Falconer said.

I agree with him. Ashley obviously was a troubled teen and no one in any authority seemed to want to try and understand her, imo. She kept rebelling at the abuse. I think I would too, being treated that way as she was. This is tragic and so sad!
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jobo on November 02, 2012, 09:50:45 AM
How sad is this, SAP?  I really don't understand why Ashley was put in jail in the first place.  Geesh, on my local Court Docket, the same clowns are up to no good, time after time....and the worst thing they get is House Arrest.

This girl was terribly abused by the System, she really was.  Jail time for throwing crab apples at a Postal Worker?? 
Give me a break.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: SAP on November 02, 2012, 12:39:02 PM
Jobo it brought me to tears. Just look at the sadness in her eyes and face. She probably had more jail time than some of the murderers and rapists!!  Plus treated much much worse.
This case that Government would like to have go away, needs to be blown wide open. I hope family starts a justice for Ashley site.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Sleuth on November 27, 2012, 11:12:38 PM
I'm not certain if this belongs here or not.

Harper Government has past 'Serious Time for Serious Crime. The Harper Government has finally passed our tough on crime law....which is

!) Ending conditional sentences for manslaughter and aggravated assault.

2) Minimum 1 year in jail for importing cocaine, heroin or crystal meth.

3) Increased minimum sentence for child molestation from 45 days to 1 year.

I'm saying....That's it!?
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: SAP on November 28, 2012, 10:37:59 AM
Huh? The Americans are getting tough. Harper's law is still a slap on the wrist. If you have followed the Katrina Smith murder investigation ... police nabbed her husband for the heinous crime (USA) of beating his wife to death. They are charging him with 4 counts of murder and also for evading telling them the truth when he was questioned. I've never seen that done before. 4 counts of murder? On one person? 
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Janice61 on November 30, 2012, 04:45:59 PM
Our system is still too lenient. I cannot understand the decisions the judges imposes, some are absurd to the sublime. For eg: life should be just that, but, they are paroled in such short sentences.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: jellybean on January 12, 2013, 07:30:17 PM
Our system of law - and how young people (with mental issues) sucks!!
Our laws in general are too lenient.  Goons within the system should be fired when it comes to the vulnerable.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: SAP on March 02, 2013, 10:26:57 AM
This pair of crack addicts were allowed to plead down after a mentally challenged relative died in their care. COD was injury to the head. This individual had been in a safe home in Calgary and then went to live with her younger sister and brother-in-law near Ardrossen.
Her treatment was beyond horrific and they were allowed to plead down. Just boggles my mind.


An Alberta couple has pleaded guilty to failing to provide the necessaries of life in the death of a developmentally-challenged woman.
Denise and Michael Scriven faced charges after Denise Scriven’s sister, Betty Gagnon, was found dead in the front seat of a truck east of Edmonton in November 2009.
Gagnon, 48, was legally blind and described as having the mind of a five-year-old. The medical examiner found she died from blunt force injury to the head.
According to the agreed statement of facts, the couple locked Gagnon inside a number of locations on the their property -- including a chicken hutch, a dog run and an unheated school bus with no toilet or running water while she was in their care.
The couple was originally charged with manslaughter, assault, unlawful confinement and failing to provide the necessaries of life.
The judge accepted the pleas and has ordered a presentence report. The couple is set to return to court for sentencing April 19.
Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: SAP on March 02, 2013, 10:31:33 AM

An Alberta couple has pleaded guilty to failing to provide the necessaries of life in the death of a developmentally-challenged woman.

Denise and Michael Scriven faced charges after Denise Scriven’s sister, Betty Anne Gagnon, was found dead in the front seat of a truck east of Edmonton in November 2009.

Gagnon, 48, was legally blind and described as having the mind of a five-year-old. The medical examiner found she died from blunt force injury to the head, but could not determine if it was caused by a blow to the face or by a fall.

According to the agreed statement of facts, the couple locked Gagnon inside a number of locations on the their property -- including a chicken hutch, a dog run and an unheated school bus with no toilet or running water while she was in their care.

Betty Anne Gagnon (centre) is shown here with her former caregivers in Calgary, Heather O'Bray (left) and Suzanne Jackett (right). Gagnon lived with O'Bray, Jackett and Sue Thomas before moving to her sister's home in Strathcona County. (Courtesy of Heather O'Bray)
Gagnon was sleeping in the bus on the night of her death. Denise Scriven took lunch out to the woman in the afternoon, and found her lying on her side, having trouble breathing. Later, when Gagnon started seizing, Denise says she took her back to the house, tried to use a funnel to force her mouth open, and started giving CPR.

Denise then dragged Gagnon off of the bus and drove her to a nearby gas station, as the couple’s rural property was hard to find.

Gagnon died in the vehicle.

Gagnon found underweight, bruised
The Medical Examiner noted that by the time of her death, Gagnon weighed only 65 pounds. She also noted bruises to the woman’s body, eyes and head.

The statement of facts said that Gagnon had lived in a private group home until 2005, when a lack of space prompted the Scrivens to take care of her.

The couple applied for support with programming and transportation for Gagnon, but both were denied, although they did receive some money from the province’s Assurance Income for the Severely Handicapped program.

"It is not disputed that both accused had tried very hard between 2005 and 2009 to provide the care Betty Anne needed," the document reads.

But the couple had trouble coping with Gagnon’s care. Denise Scrivens, who had been a registered nurse, had a breakdown in 2008 followed by declining mental health.

RCMP find video of abuse
Michael and the Denise Scrivens told RCMP that they began having trouble with Gagnon, who they described as stubborn.

They started locking the woman in the basement, and then later in the garage, which Michael described as a “jail cell.” Gagnon did not have running water when in the garage, and was given a toilet filled with kitty litter.

He told police that there were exposed nails in the garage to discourage Gagnon from leaving. He admitted that one time, he watched her try to escape the building, falling off a table and striking her head against the ground, without attempting to help her.

The RCMP also found videos of the couple punishing Gagnon, slapping and spanking her for offences such as not saying good morning and “brainwashing” Michael Scrivens by “getting in his head.”

In one video, Denise can be heard slapping Gagnon while Michael laughs.

“This is funny,” he says on the tape.

Others charges may be dropped
The couple was originally charged with manslaughter, assault, unlawful confinement and failing to provide the necessities of life.

The plea only covered the final charge; it is expected the others will be dropped in the future.

Gagnon’s former roommates from her time at the group home say they are saddened by the plea.

“We are disappointed that the dropped charges are those related to the horrific conditions that Betty Anne lived in and the inhumane, cruel and abusive way that she was treated,” wrote Suzanne Jackett, Sue Thomas and Heather O’Bray in a statement.

“This is one of the worst cases of neglect and abuse of a vulnerable person that has occurred in Alberta. We want and need something positive to come out of this. Then and only then will we be able to heal and move on.”

The judge accepted the couple’s pleas and has ordered a pre-sentence report. The couple is set to return to court for sentencing April 19


Admitting to crack cocaine use:

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: lostlinganer on June 11, 2013, 09:42:03 PM
Here's a thought:

Why not take the bullying, abusive jail guards, assign one large facility in the country to pedophiles and murderers, and put those guards to work in that facility.  See who wins!  We know these guards will never ever get fired, much less punished with jail time... so put them in charge of those who deserve them, instead of giving them average prison facilities in which they can fulfill their sick needs by brutalizing the average law breaker. 

TORONTO - Some jail guards are brutalizing inmates and covering up

'Shocking' stories of guards' brutality revealed in Ontario ombudsman report'Shocking' stories of guards' brutality revealed in Ontario ombudsman report
'Shocking' stories of guards' brutality revealed in Ontario ombudsman report
Published on June 11, 2013

Published on June 11, 2013
  Topics : Ministry of Correctional Services , Correctional Services , Ontario Public Service Employees Union , Ontario , TORONTO , Ottawa
TORONTO - Some jail guards are brutalizing inmates and covering up the abuse by destroying or falsifying records and intimidating colleagues, Ontario's ombudsman warned Tuesday.

In a report on jailhouse brutality, Andre Marin called for immediate action to root out the problem and excise the "cancer" of the code of silence around guard violence.

"Punching, slapping, kicking, stomping on someone who is under control, under restraints, is inexcusable and morally repugnant," Marin said.

"Regardless of why they are incarcerated, inmates are human beings and they deserve respect, dignity and humane treatment."

Marin's 135-page report is the product of thousands of complaints a year that were paralyzing his office.

Filled with disturbing pictures and stories, it outlines a grim reality in Ontario's 29 correctional facilities in which, Marin said, guards can assault inmates, often with complete impunity because their fellow officers don't speak up.

"This report is not pretty. It reveals some shocking stories — not just of violence within the provincial correctional system but of ugly conspiracies to cover up that violence," he said.

"It exposes corruption and a malignancy within the correctional system that has long been lamented but never eradicated: the code of silence."

Marin cited the example of "Colin," an inmate with a brain injury who was acting aggressively toward guards at a facility in Ottawa.

Six officers restrained him with handcuffs and leg restraints, then beat him to a pulp, leaving his head swollen, his face and body battered. Guards initially claimed the prisoner hit his head on the floor.

Marin was careful to blame a "rogue minority" of correctional officers who bully inmates and colleagues, but he said the aberrant behaviour has been allowed to metastasize throughout the prison system.

Part of the problem, the report finds, is overcrowding and understaffing in the province's jails that exacerbate tensions. The government, Marin said, had let the "system run amok."

The report makes 45 recommendations to the provincial government to end the "dysfunctional culture," among them better training, especially in dealing with prisoners with mental-health issues or other special needs.

Also needed is wider use of video surveillance, so guards know they are being watched and more rigorous investigations of complaints, the report said.

The government, Marin said, must focus on "malignant" peer pressure among some correctional officers.

The ombudsman, who spent years overseeing the military and police, said the extent of the code of silence among prison guards is unprecedented in his experience.

"I've never seen it so entrenched, so pervasive."

Statements from guards, he said, are vetted by their union and read like a template. Another recommendation calls for staff involved in an incident to be separated before they prepare their reports and barred from communicating with one another until after the investigation is completed.

Two summers ago, the Ministry of Correctional Services began a review of more than 3,500 files involving alleged excessive use of force and investigated 55 cases. The probe confirmed brutality in 26 of those cases.

The result was discipline against 108 staff, including 31 firings. In addition, four officers face criminal charges, and one has been convicted.

Correctional Services Minister Madeleine Meilleur said the government has already begun taking action and six internal investigations into complaints are ongoing.

"We are taking this issue very seriously," Meilleur said. "One incident is too many."

The government is setting up an oversight and investigation unit, and appointing a use-of-force auditor to enhance oversight and accountability.

The government, she said, is also implementing a zero-tolerance policy for any behaviour that threatens inmate safety or intimidates other guards.

Warren (Smokey) Thomas, the president of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, welcomed Marin's recommendations.

"We have said to the employer for decades: 'You have the tools at your disposal to deal with problem staff and we want you to deal with problem staff'," Thomas said.

Title: Re: Our Justice System
Post by: Ardy on August 14, 2013, 06:56:01 AM
Years after adopting minimum sentencing laws, the US has announced they have been a failure and are eliminating some of them. Our current government is intent on following the US path.......despite the US acknowledgement that minimum sentencing and the "War on Drugs" have been a dismal failure.


Norway has a totally different approach to incarceration for crimes, and they have excellent results.

Canada should study and adopt their methods...............and discard the failed policies of the US.

Everyone wants safer communities. The question is the best way to achieve that goal.