Alberta teen that shot German tourist sentenced and free

[OMG!WTF!]

Gladue sentencing seeks to take historical conditions affecting indigenous communities into consideration.#

On the plus side it:
Reduces the disproportionate numbers of indigenous offenders in prison.

That's the thing though. It doesn't reduce the over representation of first nations in prison. It's gotten worse since gladue sentencing began. I mean it keeps one guy out one time but the result isn't less prisoners. It is less rehabilitation and alternatives to future incarceration.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Gladue sentencing seeks to take historical conditions affecting indigenous communities into consideration.

On the plus side it:

• Reduces the disproportionate numbers of indigenous offenders in prison.

On the minus side it:

• Undermines public faith in the justice system by treating offenders differently based on their cultural origins.
• Fosters backlash against indigenous reconciliation when high-profile cases of heinous crimes by indigenous offenders are awarded light sentences.
• Since most victims of indigenous crime are other indigenous people, it has the perverse effect of reducing the severity of criminal sentencing of those who commit violent crimes against indigenous Canadians.

I don't see how the merits of the first list possibly outweigh the downsides of the second. Discarding the principle of universality in criminal justice was folly of the highest order.

Good post Cliff - I think I would also add on the plus side that measures of Aboriginal Justice traditions are also implemented.

And more on the minus side:
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/gladue/p3.html

Despite the Court’s decision in Gladue, and its subsequent call to action in Ipeelee, Gladue principles are perceived by Indigenous offenders to be ineffective and inconsistently applied (Iacobucci 2013; Pfefferle 2008 Roach 2009). Non-Indigenous offenders have benefited more from the 1996 sentencing reforms than Indigenous offenders, and overincarceration has worsened since Gladue (MacIntosh and Angrove 2012, p. 33).

Restorative and Indigenous legal tradition generally have similar underlying principles, in that both can be described as aiming to achieve community healing, reconciliation, and the reintegration of the offender. However, there are several material differences between the two.

First, Indigenous legal traditions are generally a source of complex mechanisms, both proactive and reactive, that produces and maintains stability and order in Indigenous communities. Prior to the imposition of Western law, Indigenous legal tradition “shaped behavior, guided relationships, and addressed conflict” through kinship – which Chartrand and Horn describe as producing “multidirectional legal obligations towards everyone and everything” (2016, p. 6). While Indigenous legal traditions are diverse, a common theme through most are the idea of law being interconnected, intertwined, and rooted in relationships between people and to nature (p. 5-6). In addition, Indigenous legal traditions still had a retributive element - where kinship responsibilities were disregarded, communities utilized sanctions and penalties, which were generally enforced by family or community members (p. 7). Finally, Indigenous legal traditions placed a high importance on spirituality (p. 13).

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Not a big fan of Gladue, but I have to think the fact he was a minor is a far bigger factor for the sentence. MBates knows better, but what would the max sentence be if we was not an indigenous minor? 3 years?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

This is true of most people habituated to violent crime. Our movies and TV shows are full of sinister masterminds who carry out crimes for selfish gains. But the sad truth is most violent criminals have low IQs, were neglected as children, and come from an environment rife with substance abuse.

But that doesn't lessen the suffering their crimes produce, or make them less likely to pose a threat to the rest of society.

Sure. I totally agree that people with terrible upbringings are way more likely to commit violent crime, and most violent crime is committed by people with terrible upbringings.

I just question that since a terrible upbringing is apparently a factor here, how is making this young person live with his parent going to help anything? Seems logically inconsistent.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by flamingred89

No doubt German news will pick up on this too. Bad look for Canada.

Yup. Reverse the roles and imagine your own brother and his family going to Germany on vacation and some twerp shooting him in the face for fun, getting caught and then being let out all in the span of less then 2 years. No compensation (as far as I'm aware), no justice.





My favourite part of this article

"Very influenced by the people around him who were also doing drugs, using alcohol and controlling him to a large degree," said Burgis Der.

The teen appeared by CCTV and following the sentence, the judge encouraged him to rely on the support of his family, and consult with an elder.

Whelp, I see this going well . Do the victim and his family even know the name of the shooter, since there's a media ban on his name?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by troutman

Good post Cliff - I think I would also add on the plus side that measures of Aboriginal Justice traditions are also implemented.

And more on the minus side:
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/gladue/p3.html

While Indigenous legal traditions are diverse, a common theme through most are the idea of law being interconnected, intertwined, and rooted in relationships between people and to nature (p. 5-6). In addition, Indigenous legal traditions still had a retributive element - where kinship responsibilities were disregarded, communities utilized sanctions and penalties, which were generally enforced by family or community members (p. 7). Finally, Indigenous legal traditions placed a high importance on spirituality (p. 13).

In my experience in the NWT, traditional restorative justice relies on tight kinship bonds. I think they have a role to play - especially in the cases where parties live in close proximity to one another. But even in small Northern communities, those kinship bonds are not nearly as strong or carry the authority they had in traditional communities.

[Fuzz]

So why not at least send him to one of the Healing Lodges for a year, take him out of that environment and try to get him to reflect on what happened, and maybe come out of it a better person? Sending him back to the community isn't going to fix anything.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by getbak

It can't be manslaughter if the victim didn't die, can it?

Yeah sorry, I don't know what I was thinking!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

In my experience in the NWT, traditional restorative justice relies on tight kinship bonds. I think they have a role to play - especially in the cases where parties live in close proximity to one another. But even in small Northern communities, those kinship bonds are not nearly as strong or carry the authority they had in traditional communities.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't restorative justice also include to a large part making amends to the victim of the crime?


I would like to see if they're going to do this kind of sentencing, that it becomes something that's required.

[Mr.Coffee]

I’m well aware of the opinion and viewpoint that the justice system should primarily be for rehabilitation over punishment that so many posters on this site seemingly ascribe to (anecdotally, my impression from reading threads like this over the years, could be wrong I suppose) but I don’t even see how this sentence does either.

This is a ridiculous sentence IMO. Awful carriage of justice, but I would like to caveat that yeah, obviously the public nor I have all the details. Still... very, very, very skeptical of this decision. Kind of disgusting without further public justification actually.

[MBates]

With the caveat that I have not looked into this particular case much at all, I point out a couple of things (which to me make the aboriginal commentary misplaced):

1. The Crown dropped a number of charges before trial, including attempted murder, because they did not think they had a reasonable likelihood of conviction. This is usually appropriate and should be encouraged and respected. Prosecutors have a very difficult and important obligation not to pursue charges if the evidence does not reasonably support them.

2. The prosecutor and judge and even defence counsel have no ability to re-write or ignore federal legislation. If you are upset about outcomes that are in accordance with the rule of law, then to be frank, take your share of the blame for posting anonymous complaints on a message board but not taking the time to write your MP and the Justice Minister and the Prime Minister and make reasoned pleas for change. These people actually have the ability to change the law, and all of their contact info is online.

There are countless cases where a so-called 'two tier' system - one for adults and one for youth - works well. So you will never read about them in the media. There is a mountain of scientific evidence behind it and numerous developed democracies treat youth offenders differently because their brains simply do not operate the same.

There are also entirely legitimate debates about when a minor should be considered for an adult sentence. Individual heinous facts of the crime and sympathetic circumstances of the minor will often test the limits of the merits of one side or the other in such debates.

The bottom line is that the federal YCJA applicable to this sentencing and the use of custody in a youth sentence reads:

make a custody and supervision order with respect to the young person, ordering that a period be served in custody and that a second period — which is one half as long as the first — be served, subject to sections 97 (conditions to be included) and 98 (continuation of custody), under supervision in the community subject to conditions, the total of the periods not to exceed two years from the date of the coming into force of the order or, if the young person is found guilty of an offence for which the punishment provided by the Criminal Code or any other Act of Parliament is imprisonment for life, three years from the date of coming into force of the order;

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/....html#h-470749

So this offender, with no prior criminal record, got 21 of the total possible 24 months it would appear. And he had done more than the 14 months of actual custody, so he was released to the supervision portion of the sentence.

This may in no way lessen people's anger and frustrations but might change what you are identifying as the problem and what you will or will not attempt to do about it as an engaged citizen.

Loud and sometimes scathing criticism of public institutions is essential to democracy and to justice. But I cannot help but note that when it comes time for supporting the criminal justice system with adequate resources (including for proper legal aid), and actually paying for rehabilitative and preventative services that are known to work, the silence from the community at large is routinely deafening.

[jayswin]

Yeah, this is a frustrating outcome for a heinous crime, but I feel many in here are jumping right into the indigenous treatment in our justice system that they despise (along with the whole race in a lot of cases, unfortunately) , and completely ignoring the young offender part.

Take any white kid and see the outcome of a serious crime and you'll be outraged at the sentence.