German Tourist shot in the head near Morley while driving

[chemgear]

Free on bail.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4621404/b...-tourist-shot/

[Drummer]

Wow

[Robo]

Unreal

[Envitro]

Our legal system is so ####ed.

You almost kill a guy with an illegal gun and 14 charges in total, but I forget my registration certificate while taking my pistol to the range for practice or competition and I get an automatic 2 years in jail, no bail, no parole... a summary conviction for a paperwork "crime". It doesn't matter that it's registered and that they can look it up in 15 seconds...

[soulchoice]

Kid should be jailed for min 10 years with no parole if he was the one who truly did it. Or let him rot in jail how entire life for all I care.

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Our legal system is so ####ed.

You almost kill a guy with an illegal gun and 14 charges in total, but I forget my registration certificate while taking my pistol to the range for practice or competition and I get an automatic 2 years in jail, no bail, no parole... a summary conviction for a paperwork "crime". It doesn't matter that it's registered and that they can look it up in 15 seconds...

Yeah but that kid is a moron. We expect better from law abiding gun owners like yourself.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Our legal system is so ####ed.

You almost kill a guy with an illegal gun and 14 charges in total, but I forget my registration certificate while taking my pistol to the range for practice or competition and I get an automatic 2 years in jail, no bail, no parole... a summary conviction for a paperwork "crime". It doesn't matter that it's registered and that they can look it up in 15 seconds...

This is exactly why our system is not “so ####ed”. Because the rule of law protects all of us from this type of visceral and irrational (and incorrect) response to terrible events.

The kid charged is called an accused - who is presumed by our system to be innocent. Let me repeat. The person who was ordered released yesterday is currently an innocent person.

Since we do not operate in an Alice in Wonderland system of ‘sentence first, verdict afterwards’ it makes sense that not being denied reasonable bail is a constitutional right. You see there are actually places whose system allows the government to just have armed officers put you in jail by accusing you of something - and that’s all they need do. No evidence no trial just an accusation and your liberty is gone.

I know which of those places I would rather live.

Your assertion that if accused of a firearms licensing offence that you would receive an automatic 2 years in jail with no bail and no parole is, well, completely made up. But I think you know that.

You would also be a presumed innocent person constitutionally entitled to not be denied reasonable bail and if sentenced to jail after being proved guilty then you would be subject to the same corrections legislation as everyone else. Again the rule of law shows up...

And I have quite literally negotiated resolutions with the Crown on firearms charges where they drop criminal charges specifically to prevent the accused from being subject to harsh penalties that do not reflect the true nature of their transgressions. So there’s no reason to think if you made a genuine error that you would not have a genuine opportunity to convince the Crown you deserved a similar break.

Perhaps people will find it helpful to know the judge who released this accused person was a well respected prosecutor before he became a judge? Not that it should matter at all quite frankly - you know the whole rule of law thing again.

Our system is far from perfect and there are many rational debates that can be had about proposed changes that might make it better. Spewing falsehoods does nothing to further such discussions.

[Envitro]

Hmmm, let's ramp this down a bit, clearly I'm not a lawyer and you are.

I don't think I was advocating for hanging the kid, so context is king.

Just saying that sometimes the crown can get a little aggressive on law-abiding people who make a simple clerical mistake or forget a piece of paper when their kid takes it out of the range bag or the dog goes rummaging through and get punished for it to make an example of them. Sure, 7 or 8 times out of 10 no charges are laid and a simple warning goes, but when it doesn't it gets ugly and expensive real quick for a simple paperwork crime.

Yet sometimes we see instances of "suspected" criminals, although still to be proven in court, who were alleged to have committed a heinous and extremely violent crime that ends up costing someone their life/quality of life get all the benefit of the doubt.
Maybe I'm a little sensitive these days with the talk of gun bans for no good reason, LOL.

I'm not advocating against prosecution under the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. I wouldn't have it any other way. Just saying that maybe we should be giving the extremely vetted firearms license holders the same benefit of the doubt.
This kid is accused of being in possession of a prohibited firearm, and shooting someone in the head while in possession of said firearm. I don't think I'd be treated too kindly if I was in the possession of a prohibited firearm if I wasn't properly licensed for it, just saying.

I have heard plenty of first-hand stories from police officers and prison guards that our justice system leaves a lot to be desired as far as actual punishment for violent criminals goes. This is just another potential example. We'll see how it shakes out but it's not looking too great for actual "justice" for the victims here, even if he gets convicted.

Didn't mean to offend, sorry.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Hmmm, let's ramp this down a bit, clearly I'm not a lawyer and you are.

I don't think I was advocating for hanging the kid, so context is king.

...

Didn't mean to offend, sorry.

You set the context...you opened your post following the news of an accused being granted bail with “Our legal system is so ####ed.”

I am not offended. I strongly disagree. And made my case for why I disagree.

Next time maybe pause for a brief moment before attacking the entire system and just ask yourself, what if the kid they charged didn’t do it?

[Flabbibulin]

Originally Posted by MBates

You set the context...you opened your post following the news of an accused being granted bail with “Our legal system is so ####ed.”

I am not offended. I strongly disagree. And made my case for why I disagree.

Next time maybe pause for a brief moment before attacking the entire system and just ask yourself, what if the kid they charged didn’t do it?

Reacting to this type of news in an irrational and visceral way, to quote you, is both natural and human. And I would suggest the large majority of people familiar with this story would react quite negatively to the accused being released, citing flaws in the legal system. Being calm and measured, enlightened by an understanding of the law perhaps and the purpose it serves to protect citizens from the quick tempered reaction of the masses, is not natural. You say you were not offended, but your post have a tone of "I can't believe people would criticize the legal system for this".

Of course, your post is accurate in pointing out why this individual was released- but there is clearly a general feeling among the public that individuals charged with these crimes are typically found guilty, thus we can lay blame and shame well in advance. Ya, that is irrational, but only human. Rage and anger can't wait.

[Envitro]

OK, sure.

But maybe bail, in my mind, should be granted to people not accused of horrendously violent crimes.

Sure he can go to school and go to hockey games, as per the judge's conditions. OK, it's not that unreasonable in the grand scheme of things.

Let's hope all judges are so reasonable and understanding in every case then... An adult accused of a similar crime may not necessarily be given the chance to go back to work so that they don't lose their house and their family can pay the bills.

[OMG!WTF!]

I'm wondering if the prosecution doesn't have much of a case and the judge let him out based on a fairly weak body of evidence.

[Johnny Makarov]

Better yet. Charge the parents!
Young offenders act is a joke in this country so that would be the bridge.

[Superfraggle]

Originally Posted by Envitro

OK, sure.

But maybe bail, in my mind, should be granted to people not accused of horrendously violent crimes.

Sure he can go to school and go to hockey games, as per the judge's conditions. OK, it's not that unreasonable in the grand scheme of things.

Let's hope all judges are so reasonable and understanding in every case then... An adult accused of a similar crime may not necessarily be given the chance to go back to work so that they don't lose their house and their family can pay the bills.

Which is it? You think bail should be denied in both cases or you think the fictional adult should also get bail?

I am fully on board with the idea that innocent people should not be spending time in jail. If you want to debate the merits of innocent until proven guilty, that is a whole other discussion, but I for one am happy to know that if I am falsely accused of a crime I will not be spending time in jail until and unless I am found guilty.

Because that's what this concept is really about. Not the guilty person who will end up serving their time after sentencing, but the innocent person who should not serve any time for a crime they didn't commit.

Yes, there are shades of grey for things like danger to the public in the meantime and likelihood to flee, but my understanding is that this is considered as part of the bail process and the judge knows a hell of a lot more about the case than we do.

[Envitro]

Don't misunderstand, I think that everyone should get bail unless a public risk exists or if the accused is a flight risk.

How we determine public risk may be different, but if the judge determined that the kid isn't a risk to the public and he won't shoot anyone else in the head that's driving a vehicle full of people, that could have caused mass casualties, that's fine.

Sure the judge know more about the case than the both of us combined, so whatever.
I'm not going to lose my mind over it.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by Flabbibulin

Reacting to this type of news in an irrational and visceral way, to quote you, is both natural and human. And I would suggest the large majority of people familiar with this story would react quite negatively to the accused being released, citing flaws in the legal system. Being calm and measured, enlightened by an understanding of the law perhaps and the purpose it serves to protect citizens from the quick tempered reaction of the masses, is not natural. You say you were not offended, but your post have a tone of "I can't believe people would criticize the legal system for this".

Of course, your post is accurate in pointing out why this individual was released- but there is clearly a general feeling among the public that individuals charged with these crimes are typically found guilty, thus we can lay blame and shame well in advance. Ya, that is irrational, but only human. Rage and anger can't wait.

Of course I can believe people would criticize the legal system for this - and I have no difficulty accepting it is "natural and human" to react in an irrational and visceral way.

Which is fundamentally one of the main purposes for having a legal system based on the rule of law (and in the case of criminal matters the presumption of innocence and burden on the state to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt).

A legal system that protects us from irrational visceral natural human reactions is precisely the point.

And, to quote myself, from the opening sentence of my post:

This is exactly why our system is not “so ####ed”. Because the rule of law protects all of us from this type of visceral and irrational (and incorrect) response to terrible events.

I am not sure who is making my point more effectively, but it seems to me we are making the same point.

In any event, conveniently for my point (though coming from a case in Florida) only a couple of hours ago a nearly executed man was just exonerated:

https://www.innocenceproject.org/cle...re-exonerated/

“Mr. Aguirre was nearly executed for a crime he didn’t commit,” said Joshua Dubin, one of Aguirre’s lead trial attorneys. “While we are overjoyed that his ordeal is finally over, the case of Clemente Aguirre should serve as a chilling cautionary tale about how dangerous it is when there is a rush to judgment in a capital case. Mr. Aguirre pleaded for the blood to be tested and thankfully his post-conviction attorneys got that done. So when the results of those tests revealed that Samantha Williams’ blood was found within inches of the victim’s blood, and that she repeatedly confessed that she committed the crime to multiple witnesses, it boggles the mind that Mr. Aguirre even faced the prospect of being sent back to death row a second time.”

[jayswin]

MBates posts on legal matters are incredible. You like to think all lawyers think, speak and act this way, but that really isn't true as we're all human.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Our legal system is so ####ed.

You almost kill a guy with an illegal gun and 14 charges in total, but I forget my registration certificate while taking my pistol to the range for practice or competition and I get an automatic 2 years in jail, no bail, no parole... a summary conviction for a paperwork "crime". It doesn't matter that it's registered and that they can look it up in 15 seconds...

I don't want to de-rail this much further, but I hope you can honestly ask yourself this question: would your reaction be different if this had happened near almost any other small town in Alberta, instead of Morley?

It's okay either way, no judgment, no need to answer here...I just really encourage you (and any others who have had strong knee-jerk reactions in this thread) to be honest with yourselves and ask why a few times.


FWIW, I don't doubt there would be just as much condemnation of a dumb 16 y.o. white boy, but I don't think the tone of reaction would include nearly as much presumed guilt

[Envitro]

Oh man, don't even go there...

No matter the race, gender, sexual preference or hair colour, I'd want everyone to be treated the exact same in the eyes of the law and our justice system.

I could care less if the kid was from Olds or Nanton or Tsu'Tina.
I've played hockey on the res and with lots of FN dudes for years. None of that crap matters to me. You're definitely reading way too much into that post.

I don't want anyone getting special treatment due to political climate, white privilege or anything else that can be construed as an advantage.

In my opinion, (and opinion is key here), the kid shouldn't necessarily be out on bail due to the heinous, violent and extremely careless nature of the crime. He could have killed four people in that vehicle, and possibly more if it had collided with another one on the highway after he pulled the trigger. Sure, he's accused and not convicted yet and I'm sure the judge ruled that he's not a danger to the general public, so I'll live with that decision and move on with my life.

However, if he's convicted then I don't want him out in 6 months or a year, since people tend to forget that a lot of our violent offenders don't serve a tonne of time (this is first hand from friends that work in the justice/correctional system).

[Snuffleupagus]

This act of violence obviously exhibits psychotic behavior, the defense will get him into a posh hospital and after 2 years some doctor will say he's "fixed"