Gas Stations Gas and Dash Incident

[karl262]

Originally Posted by darklord700

Sad day for the judicial system in Canada, I'm not expecting much but there should be at the minimum a manslaghter charge.

I agree. The guy willingly ran someone over with that size of vehicle.

[CaptainCrunch]

Criminal negligence causing death up to 14 years in prison

Hit and run causing death is 10 years

Dangerous driving causing death 2 years less a day.

He'll probably get 5 years in total and be out in less then two.

Kinda sucks, but really he's just trying to get away, likely not kill her.

He was trying to get away while committing a criminal act, and killed her. How about instead of trying to get away he not kill her and make the right decision.

As much as I hope they throw the book at this scumbag, its not going to happen.

The driver wasn't a minor he was an adult with a fully functioning brain and everything and he chose to put the life of the victim in danger and he killed her.

I hope he rots.

[Acey]

I must be looking in the wrong place then, cause I see...

Causing death by criminal negligence: Max life in prison
Dangerous operation causing death: Max 14 years
Failing to stop at scene of accident involving bodily harm or death: Max life in prison

Non-firearm manslaughter carries no minimum and the same max of life prison.

[Acey]

Hit and run

Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life if

(a) the person knows that another person involved in the accident is dead; or
(b) the person knows that bodily harm has been caused to another person involved in the accident and is reckless as to whether the death of the other person results from that bodily harm, and the death of that other person so results.

Criminal negligence

220. Every person who by criminal negligence causes death to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable
(a) where a firearm is used in the commission of the offence, to imprisonment for life and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of four years; and
(b) in any other case, to imprisonment for life.

Dangerous operation causing death

(4) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1) and thereby causes the death of any other person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

Obviously he's not getting life but his charges provide for it.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I was just speculating on the actual sentence, not the maximums. The over/under must be around 5. (I don't think they usually provide for consecutive sentences, but I could be wrong on that).

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by Acey

Charges for 20 year old:

- Criminal negligence causing death
- Hit and run causing death
- Dangerous driving causing death

16 year old passenger not charged.

Kinda sucks, but really he's just trying to get away, likely not kill her.

Did I ever call it in my earlier post!

Many people in this country think our country has laws similar to America (vehicular homicide etc) that couldnt be further from the truth.

The accused will only be convicted of one of these charges. The Kinapple principle applies (can't be convicted of two different offences for the same conduct)

I'm going to guess 4 or 5 years for a sentence.

[Regorium]

Will anything show up on the 16 year old's record if they're not charging him?

Not even just a fine for theft under $2500 or whatever?

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Will anything show up on the 16 year old's record if they're not charging him?

Not even just a fine for theft under $2500 or whatever?

A youth has their record sealed and destroyed 3 years after a summary offence if they haven't received any subsequent offence. It's either 5 or 7 years for an indictable offence.

If he's not charged and convicted of anything, than no, nothing will show up on his record at any time.

So if you kill someone at 14, you won't have a criminal record when applying for jobs in your 20s assuming you stayed out of trouble after that time.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I was just speculating on the actual sentence, not the maximums. The over/under must be around 5. (I don't think they usually provide for consecutive sentences, but I could be wrong on that).

Not for the same offence per Kienapple, as above.

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

The accused will only be convicted of one of these charges. The Kinapple principle applies (can't be convicted of two different offences for the same conduct)

I'm going to guess 4 or 5 years for a sentence.

Word. Failure to remain/dangerous op will be stayed, and he gets 5 years or so on the criminal negligence charge.

[blueski]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

Did I ever call it in my earlier post!

Many people in this country think our country has laws similar to America (vehicular homicide etc) that couldnt be further from the truth.

The accused will only be convicted of one of these charges. The Kinapple principle applies (can't be convicted of two different offences for the same conduct)

I'm going to guess 4 or 5 years for a sentence.

I'd guess 3-4 for the sentence, out in two. BRUTAL.

[Acey]

For what it's worth, non-firearm manslaughter carries no minimum. We'd be in only slightly better shape.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by blueski

I'd guess 3-4 for the sentence, out in two. BRUTAL.

Federal sentence (2 years on the dot and over) you can get parole after 1/3 of your time. Harper's govt is trying to change this now.

Provincial time (2 years less a day and under) release is usually at 2/3 of a sentence.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by Acey

For what it's worth, non-firearm manslaughter carries no minimum. We'd be in only slightly better shape.

I saw a woman get convicted of killing her husband before (manslaughter) after years and years of him beating the #### out of her. She got time served of a few months plus probation. It was the right sentence.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by jschick88

Meghan Grant ‏@CBCMeg 113 minutes ago

Trust fund now set-up for gas & dash victim's husband & son. At any TD Bank: In Trust for Ahmad and Koroosh. Branch #01729 act #6737034 #cbc

Anyone know how to donate to this online? I'm part of the lazy philanthropic generation.

[Flames_Gimp]

if he gets less than 10 years it's a joke. There's no deterrent to committing crimes in Canada!

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

if he gets less than 10 years it's a joke. There's no deterrent to committing crimes in Canada!

1 day of jail is enough of a deterrent for me.

Deterrence doesn't apply to 90% of the criminals in Canada. They don't think of the consequences, nor are they usually in a sober state of mind to.

People with jobs, houses, lack of records are the only ones that deterrence really applies to, and that's a small % of criminals in Canada. If you're already a poor ass criminal with a record, what's another conviction?

[Jets4Life]

I'm willing to bet anything that the guy who stole the car has a long history with police. Car thieves usually do, and they start out young. I hope Alberta can implement the initiative they did for Winnipeg a decade ago:

A co-operative strategy heralded for dramatic cuts in Winnipeg's auto theft problem over the last five years has won two international policing awards.

In a joint statement issued Tuesday, the province, the Winnipeg Police Service and Manitoba Public Insurance said the Winnipeg Auto Theft Suppression Strategy (WATSS) has won honours from the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

Introduced in 2005, WATSS combines the efforts of police, probation officers, prosecutors and MPI to crack down on a subculture of city teens who habitually steal cars and drive them dangerously. Another aspect of the program is a mandatory immobilizer initiative for vehicles deemed most at risk of being stolen.

From a policing point of view, the core of the program involves analyzing data regarding teens identified as the most chronic auto-theft offenders. Police found that when a hard-core group of these teens were in custody, the rate of auto theft dropped. By strictly monitoring these youths while out in public and enforcing any court order breaches, streets became safer.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...wards-1.869629

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Johnny199r

1 day of jail is enough of a deterrent for me.

Dunno about that. When I was younger, there's plenty of crimes I'd commit for only one day in jail, and I don't consider myself much of a criminal. Maybe not plenty, but...

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by Jets4Life

I'm willing to bet anything that the guy who stole the car has a long history with police. Car thieves usually do, and they start out young. I hope Alberta can implement the initiative they did for Winnipeg a decade ago:

A co-operative strategy heralded for dramatic cuts in Winnipeg's auto theft problem over the last five years has won two international policing awards.

In a joint statement issued Tuesday, the province, the Winnipeg Police Service and Manitoba Public Insurance said the Winnipeg Auto Theft Suppression Strategy (WATSS) has won honours from the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

Introduced in 2005, WATSS combines the efforts of police, probation officers, prosecutors and MPI to crack down on a subculture of city teens who habitually steal cars and drive them dangerously. Another aspect of the program is a mandatory immobilizer initiative for vehicles deemed most at risk of being stolen.

From a policing point of view, the core of the program involves analyzing data regarding teens identified as the most chronic auto-theft offenders. Police found that when a hard-core group of these teens were in custody, the rate of auto theft dropped. By strictly monitoring these youths while out in public and enforcing any court order breaches, streets became safer.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...wards-1.869629

It was easy for them to fix the problem after a while because the kids turned 18 and were given longer adult sentences. That was the real story. More timing than anything.

[N-E-B]

Disappointed the 16 year old was not charged. He is a party to the offence. He should be charged.

Also I absolutely despise the YCJA. That POS should be named and shown.