Why halfway houses need to be relocated to gated communities;
Judges in several provinces are rebelling against the Conservative government’s attempt to make all convicted criminals pay a surcharge to fund victim services.
The mandatory charge is a new flashpoint between the judiciary and the federal government. Two years ago, an Ontario Court judge opposed to The Truth in Sentencing Act – which ended two-for-one credit for pretrial detention – called on other judges to give shorter sentences to make up for harsh jailhouse conditions.
h/t nv53
Hmmm. The Globe’s comment policy states several restrictive statements, including not being allowed to make unsubstantiated allegations.
I guess they reserve that right for real journalists.
A victim surcharge on the convicted is pretty disgusting. Treating prisoners like a government cash cows creates unintentional incentives. If there is a monetary seven pounds to take then that should be hashed out in a case-by-case basis and the money should never get in the government’s hands. This government’s TUFfGAI ON KRIMe policies continue to be stupid, and judges are right to ignore or repudiate them
LAS,
You’re skewed logic always make me laugh. Keep the jokes coming.
And if you really feel that criminals are hard done by, why don’t you volunteer at a halfway house?
Amen Kate. Better yet, every judge’s basement should be a halfway house.
If would be only right to publish the names of the Judges. Without names & policy statements, the Story is BS
Ontario Court Judge Stephen Hunter is one!
Democracy & judicial activism are not inclusive. The Courts are corrupt! What justice is served or do the fines limit brown bag Kickbacks. Look for a money trail
Somehow I couldn’t find many comments with any sympathy whatsoever for the *victims* of crimes. All of the wailing and gnashing of teeth was concerned with convicted criminals.
The notion of adding financial responsibility for criminal actions to punitive incarceration is very straightforward and logical. The fact that victims have been ignored by the criminal justice system is a long-standing shame and fault.
The problem is that for liberals, it’s not the *criminals* fault that they rob, rape or murder. It’s society’s fault for driving innocent, oppressed individuals to commit acts of desperation. A person who has a thriving business is just asking to be robbed; he has no right to amass so much money.
There’s an old joke that I can’t remember as clearly as I’d like. Two liberals are walking down the road, and they come across a man who has been robbed and beaten. The liberals look at each other and say, “Quick! Someone get the man who did this to a sociologist!”
“The fact that victims have been ignored by the criminal justice system is a long-standing shame and fault.”
What about victims of the criminal ‘justice’ ‘system’?
I think victim surcharges are crap. Not a fan of slush funds. I do think that where a criminal cases duplicates a potential civil case that damages should routinely be ordered. Chances of ever collecting are low but rich kids are criminals too and they will eventually get tired of poverty.
What about victims of the criminal ‘justice’ ‘system’?
Yes, the victims are often victimized twice, once by the criminal and again by the justice system.
This is a step towards restorative justice. That can only be a good thing. Give the victim back what they lost (actually should be restored double), and teach the criminal the value of things.
LASsie said: “A victim surcharge on the convicted is pretty disgusting.”
Its called “restitution”, LASsie. They did the crime, should -I- be the one on the hook for helping their victims? I think not. THEY are on the hook.
In the inevitable event that the particular criminal’s earning capacity and resources fall woefully short of restoring his victim’s property and health, the rest of the criminal set should get dinged before the taxpayer. Like health insurance, but for crime.
Then there is the concept of “punishment”, also apparently foreign to LASsie and liberals alike. We haven’t even looked at that yet.
Whether our liberal infested Justice system can be trusted with carrying out mandates of restitution and punishment is a separate issue. I have my doubts.
Colin Westman complains that he and fellow judges are paid $250k per year to make decisions but victim restitution is not included. He therefore will ignore or skirt the law. He’s clearly overpaid; it’s not hard to find individuals who will ignore or skirt the law for free. That he and those like him (see G&M comments) can empathise more with the perpetrator than with the victim defies understanding. Not at all unlike the old saw of the person accused of murdering his parents appealing for clemency because he’s an orphan.
I have about as much use for criminals paying a surcharge as I have for sentencing circles. Just concentrate on protecting society and never mind the ‘restoration/rehabilitation’ crap for career criminals.
However, I’ve maintained for years that the best thing the grassroots could do to change the Liberal attitudes of our Ivory Tower Set (including judges and lawmakers) would be to buy a mansion or two in Westmount, Bridle Path, Point Grey and all the other tony urban neighbourhoods and rent the joints out to every kind of trash imaginable.
Its called “restitution”, LASsie.
Actually, it’s called ‘a slush fund’. RTFA
Rehabilitative methods show significant promise in Sweden. They have an incarceration rate 1/10 America’s. Doesn’t mean that they would work here but they should be attempted on a trial basis. There’s this persistent notion that jail is easy and the incarecerated are pampered. This is a myth.
I’m not coming out in favour of a judge who refuses to apply the law, nor in favour of criminals over victims. But I do have a problem with a blanket “Victim Surcharge” when such a surcharge does not actually go to the victim of the crime in question.
There ARE victimless crimes. Possession/use of illicit drugs is one such crime. We may deem certain acts to be criminal because of the “moral hazard,” but that is not the same as there being actual victims. Drug possession. Hate speech causing no actual injury. Best!ality…the list goes on.
In fact, I believe in Alberta if not other provinces, there is a “Victims of Crime” surcharge even on such things as speeding tickets. If it weren’t tenuous enough on actual criminal matters, it’s pretty hard to justify that on a speeding ticket.
I forgot to mention “Article 75 of protocol I” international UN law. If these Judges are engaged in political activism their position with regard to international law should be questioned. Does Brussels dictates Canadian LAW? Why would they question
Canadian law on such a trivial issue unless they wanted to
demonize Canadian democracy
BTW: Hillary Clinton made an executive, in violation of Congress & the US constitution, decision to adhere to Article 75 Protocol 1. No chance she will be successful in 2016
BTW: The UN is also behind R&D to be controlled by Universities!
Sweden? yeah right../
http://www.d-intl.com/2013/10/15/sweden-a-new-hell-for-women/?lang=en
Oh, for pity’s sake. In Ontario, this ‘victim’ surcharge is levied on EVERY OFFENCE, no matter how trivial. Get a ticket for not coming to a “COMPLETE” stop? You’ll pay the $140, plus another $21 for the victim. There wasn’t a victim? No problem.. the Liberals will be happy to take your money. (Although, to be fair, I think it was the Ontario Tories who introduced this.)
I don’t have a problem for restitution where there is an actual victim, but really – an extra $15 on every little traffic offence? It’s just another cash grab.
Yes, there are “victimless” crimes. In those instances, the convicted offender should be required to pay an least a portion (say “court costs”, the wages of all the court personnel for the duration of the trial, and use of the courtroom).
As to civil action against criminals – that requires the victim to front legal costs. Since most criminals will be unable to make more than a token payment (unless a structured settlement is reached) lawyers won’t accept the cases on a percentage contingency fee, and instead will bill by the hour. I think that the phantom’s idea (“the rest of the criminal set should get dinged before the taxpayer. Like health insurance, but for crime.”) has a great deal of merit. Place the burden of compensation on the offenders, rather than on insurance companies.
And I do agree that if this is nothing more than a slush fund, to be looted for whatever purposes the government wants – well, enough of our money is already being wasted; no reason to give them a new source.
What is wrong with these judges …. If you make it easier to be a criminal, you will get lots more of them. That is human nature. Liberals cannot understand that. That is why their philosophies are in direct conflict with human nature. Think about how they want us all to live (or die) and tell me if any of it interests you.
It would be wise to reconsider punishing criminal instead of working and paying big time to make them comfortable.
LAS, suspecting that you are Liberal, your acute sense of projection must see a slush fund behind every bush.
A few years back I shot a moose which appeared to be a calf. It was a cow and we didn’t have a cow tag. Called the MNR and reported it. I got a $165.00 fine + a 25% victim surcharge. What the moose did with that money they wouldn’t tell me.
Liberals always forget how criminals become criminals. By looting, killing, abusing none criminals.
They have a love affair with the criminally minded because they think like them. The left has always had a soft spot for the arsonists of civilization being of like propensity.
Socialist party
The real criminals are the ruling class( who oddly enough are mostly socialists RD) who run a capitalist system which robs the poor to give to the rich. Join the Socialist Party and fight for a socialist society.
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/17114/17-07-2013/who-are-the-real-criminals
Criminals make money from these victim funds and they shouldn’t. If they get into a fight with another prisoner or something they’ll both be charged, likely convicted, and both get paid out. Convicts should be exempted.
The case law has shifted heavily against the people in the last 15 years or so, and needs to be rebalanced. No question on it, any ethical lawyer will tell you that. Same with police or judges, it’s the activist type, and those that think criminals just need a hug with a warm blanket who feel that even with all the protections in case law, and via the charter…it doesn’t go far enough. I’ve seen my fair share of outrageous sentences in superior courts in Ontario.
How many police officers make victims compensation claims?
If judges can ignore the law, then we have no law.
2 issues here, 1 is the levy it’d self, and the other is the “judges” disobeying the law, which is ironic, as they are sitting in judgment of others who disobeyed the law. Judges, like us underlings should learn they that they need to obey the law even if they don’t agree with it. Now as to the poor ppl who are “victimized” by this dreadfull “tax”, well suck it up butter cup and learn to obey the law and there’s no problem, tho I will agree that non criminal issuses should be exempt (ie. traffic violations that have no victums)
hey village idiot (L-ass-Y, why don’t you come with me and I can show you these poor destitute “victims-of-society” who are broke, ‘cept when beer time rolls around
In GlennWorld all those convicts would be learning waaaay more than they wanted to know about subsistence farming. And if they chose not to work, oh well.
Joey W,
I am not much better at remembering jokes but I think it ends with the two liberals saying ; ” quick we need to find who did this, he needs our help!”
And so grows the kleptocracy.
This is the just-us system at work, all bureaucracies must grow, judges,cops, politicians they all need clients, they do not need law abiding citizens, just your money and fear.
They will not impose victim surcharges upon actual destroyers, that would reduce their client base, instead stick it to the taxpayer violating the money grab ordinances, you know the ones that you are guilty unless you spend more cash/lost time, than the fee, to defend yourself.
Legalized theft.
Thats why it is a just-us system and these organized criminals protect their own.
Have you noticed? The “people of status” never seem to get prosecuted, either the charges are not laid, or the crown takes “too long” to proceed, or a legality is invented, one of the reasons no one is ever held accountable in government.
Bow down before your elected and appointed royalty.
Of course the blatant contempt for law, equality before the law and justice, expressed by our judges, bureaucrats and police chiefs is an open attack on the foundation of our society and civilization.
By people who swore an oath, to uphold..
Treason by its old name and nature.
I think some may forget that activist judges are duelling with the government. Isn’t it time to elect our judges?
LAS, you used Sweden as an example for restorative justice. Logic fail, as they say.
Isn’t it time to elect our judges?
God no. Excessive democratization of the justice system has turned the US justice system, at least at the local level, into a populist farce. Judges are not supposed to be beholden to the common peon. Activist judges are much of the reason we still have the liberties we do.
LAS, you used Sweden as an example for restorative justice. Logic fail, as they say.
I’d ask you to explain but I know you can’t.
We can dispense with the nonsense that you are a seasoned or any way intelligent rhetorician. Your tactics range from pretending you know big words to calling people names because they don’t agree with you. Quite simply, the Tories like it, you’re against it. Unelected judges get to make law on the fly. Does that sound ethically, legally or politically sound to you?
Sweden doesn’t have the crime rate, attitude or even the population to make such a study worth while. They did have some interesting ideas on getting people off of drugs, though, but I’m sure you don’t want to hear about that.
too bad the judges are not there to actually uphold the law.
Judges (and the parole board, etc) should be allowed discretion in reducing sentence terms. Other professionals such as engineers get to make judgment calls in their work too.
However, during the period of the shortened sentence, if someone re-offends or engages in activity that leads to subsequent re-offence, the judge should be personally liable.
Judges expect no less of other professions.
LAS >
“A victim surcharge on the convicted is pretty disgusting”
Of course the mentally ill left would be against this, think of all the pot smokers and pedophiles that would need to pay out.
It’s the same reason they’re against guns – Criminal records and mental health issues = they can’t legally own them!
But don’t worry L’ass this will never pass because there are too many Liberals in Parliament with criminal records as well.
A very Ontarian story. I shot a wrong-tail deer here and turned myself in. SERM confiscated the deer and thanked me and said o.k., go back out and get the right one.
“…I’d ask you to explain but you can’t.”
Oh yes, he can. We’d ask you to understand, but you can and you will choose not to.
LASsie said: “Actually, it’s called ‘a slush fund’. RTFA”
Here LASsie, let me make it plain for you:
“The victim-services fine has sparked another backlash in the judiciary, now that judges can no longer waive the “victim fine surcharge” of up to $200 for impoverished offenders.”
Two hundred bucks is a “slush fund” LASsie? Its a speeding ticket! It is a fine for being found GUILTY of a crime. Do the crime, pay the fine? Duh? Anybody home?
Last I looked, the purpose of having courts and fines etc. was to slap people upside their heads when they misbehave. Maybe if they put these decrepit @$$h0l3$ on a chain gang and made them pick up garbage for minimum wage every time they act up, they might not act up so much?
How dare Parliament make laws that the judges have to apply!
Hilarious. I have to tell this true story, somewhat related. Several years ago the CDN board agent stopped Yankee moose hunters going back to Maine. “How was the hunt” enquired Capt Canuck. “easy” said giddy Yanks. “got a stupid moose standing right next to a farmer’s barn’. Upon examination it was discovered they had shot some poor slob’s mule. Probably would have been worth it to let it go and let the Yanks stew up the meat.
“Judges are not supposed to be beholden to the common peon.”
Why not, exactly?
“Activist judges are much of the reason we still have the liberties we do.”
Except when they know full well that legislation like C68 are non-constitutional, yet when asked don’t do anything about it. They only “allow” what “liberties” they feel we(us peons) should have. Speaks to your character that you are okay with that.