[onetwo_threefour]

Troutman's right...

There's no reverse onus with respect to sentencing for anyone but youth. As such the argument is that the reverse onus, which applies only to youth, is unfair. Reverse onuses are generally seen as unfair without strong countervailing reasons, such as where the evidentiary burden is impossible for the party who would normally have the burden to meet. In this case that is patently untrue. The Crown can adduce evidence as to why an adult sentence is more appropriate than a youth sentence and leave to the judge. If Parliament wants to make sentencing guidelines tricter for youth, then they should do that, they shouldn't create unfair evidentiary burdens as a back door to doing so.