Judges.....two years for murder

[Guest American Woman]

How old do you have to be to be responsible for murder? To some, it's easy! You pick a birthday. The night before, you can't. When dawn breaks, something changes in your brain and it's different.

[..]

[...]It's madness to forego any discipline on young offenders and then suddenly consider them adults from the morning of a birthday!

I agree with you completely. That's why whenever I've been asked 'what age should be considered too young to be tried as an adult?' I don't give a concrete answer. I always say a person's brain isn't magically 'fully developed' at such-and-such an age, and not capable of good judgement one day and then totally capable the next.

That's why crimes such as murder should be tried on a case by case basis. There should be no automatic 'he's only 15/16 and as such doesn't know what he's doing' mentality that automatically gives a young murderer an 'out' for the crime. The juvenile's level of 'threat to society' should be every bit as much a factor as his age.

He [the murderer] stabbed 14-year-old Rajiv (Ravi) Dharamdial five times in the chest and abdomen, two fatal wounds penetrating his heart. Then he ran away.

The teenaged killer rinsed the knife with bleach and dropped it down a sewer. He threw away or burned the clothes he had been wearing at the murder scene. Then, after police released a description of the killer, he cut his hair and stayed in hiding until surrendering to police with his lawyer eight days after the murder.

Sounds to me as if he knew exactly what he was doing. link

Furthermore, from what I've read, there is nothing to indicate that he's been "rehabilitated."

Edited May 8, 2010 by American Woman

[eyeball]

Furthermore, from what I've read, there is nothing to indicate that he's been "rehabilitated."

That's why I half seriously wonder whether the people who are releasing him are trying to advance an agenda for a harsher justice system by producing an event that's guaranteed to galvanize people.

[Handsome Rob]

What matters to me is that experts at crime and rehabilitation deal with these issues.

Having longer sentences creates all sorts of other problems. All that longer sentences would achieve is to make you feel better and frankly I really don't give a crap about that.

After 52 priors, keeping them locked up for an extended period of time keeps them off the streets, keeps them from re-offending because they're in prison. I'm all for rehabilitation, 1st, 2nd, 3rd chance, hell, 10th chance, but at what point does somebody give up?

Beyond that, I find the idea of somebody being in prison for murder less than 10 years repulsive. In murder you take something that cannot be given back, it's punishment, forget about rehabilitation.

[bloodyminded]

How old do you have to be to be responsible for murder? To some, it's easy! You pick a birthday. The night before, you can't. When dawn breaks, something changes in your brain and it's different.

The immortal scifi writer Robert Heinlein illustrated this point in his novel Starship Troopers. A teacher was describing the social conditions of the late 20th century to a class of young students. He used the example of raising a puppy, where when the puppy messed on the floor you had to scold him and let him know he had done wrong but this didn't mean at all that you didn't love your puppy.

He described how with children below the age of majority the system would let young offenders away with anything , with repeated dismissals and probation, until the magic age of becoming a legal adult. Then they threw them in jail!

He likened this to letting a puppy run wild and mess wherever it wanted until it was full grown and then if it messed on the carpet you shot it!

His point was obvious. It's madness to forego any discipline on young offenders and then suddenly consider them adults from the morning of a birthday!

Heinlein referred to the last half of the 20th Century as "The Crazy Years".

Right. We shouldn't have arbitrary age restrictions on one's right to buy alcohol, or vote, or join the military. Let's get rid of them. People as young as twelve and thirteen are adults, as I'm soberly informed. So we must also get rid of the unfair laws surrounding statutory rape and sexual inteference. You cannot rape a consenting adult.

Edited May 8, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Wild Bill]

Right. We shouldn't have arbitrary age restrictions on one's right to buy alcohol, or vote, or join the military. Let's get rid of them. People as young as twelve and thirteen are adults, as I'm soberly informed. So we must also get rid of the unfair laws surrounding statutory rape and sexual inteference. You cannot rape a consenting adult.

You've got it backwards! We should apply the laws with REAL punishments to young offenders to teach them that there are limits to unacceptable behaviour!

If there is a real punishment for breaking a window then perhaps you can correct bad behaviour before it gets out of hand. With the present system, young offenders learn that they can do whatever they want with impunity, at least until their age of majority birthday. By then habits may be hard to break.

[eyeball]

You've got it backwards! We should apply the laws with REAL punishments to young offenders to teach them that there are limits to unacceptable behaviour!

If there is a real punishment for breaking a window then perhaps you can correct bad behaviour before it gets out of hand. With the present system, young offenders learn that they can do whatever they want with impunity, at least until their age of majority birthday. By then habits may be hard to break.

Under your system prisons would become processing centers for turning juvenile delinquents into adult criminals.

[Wild Bill]

Under your system prisons would become processing centers for turning juvenile delinquents into adult criminals.

You must be right! The success of the present system speaks for itself!

[Guest American Woman]

If there is a real punishment for breaking a window then perhaps you can correct bad behaviour before it gets out of hand. With the present system, young offenders learn that they can do whatever they want with impunity, at least until their age of majority birthday. By then habits may be hard to break.

I agree with you completely. Kids need to be taught from an early age that there are consequences for their actions. We can't expect them to know it if we don't teach them, ie: hold them responsible, and by giving them a slap on the wrist, we are in effect saying 'this is the worst that will happen.' So of course there's no incentive not to act accordingly, and it's why there are so many juvenile repeat offenders.

The best way to teach kids not to break the law is to hold them accountable when they do. We're not doing them any favors by in effect teaching them that they can get away with whatever.

[eyeball]

You must be right! The success of the present system speaks for itself!

That's right, crime is down.

I think if we turn our justice system into a vengeance system we'll only end up cultivating harder criminals and see crime increase.

[Army Guy]

Ummm according to the time lines it was a 13 or 14 year old kid, not a man, who killed another kid.

Why didn't you say when a man can kill a kid and receive a 2 year sentence...?

This is why we use impartial experts to decided these cases.

Actually i was refing to the other example that was used in the post, the one listed below...but i think that both examples are pretty clear and pretty light for murder...which is the piont is it not...Or are you saying these are examples that proves our system is working and on track to eliminate crime altogether.

In both cases you don't have to be impartial expert to see that the punishment does not fit the crimes.

What is your sons or daugters life worth ?...20 months or 2 years is not justice, it's a joke...another slap in the face of the victims face, and another huge burden for the family to carry around...

Judge Stephen Glithero sentenced the 55-year-old St. Catharines construction worker to one day in jail Thursday for the death of 29-year-old Stephine Beck.

The one-day sentence is in addition to time Ryczak already served in jail since his March 5, 2007 arrest - time the judge said was equivalent to 30 months."

These Stats can figure suggest serious crimes in Canada are up not down...And crimes committed by youths are also up...

My linkwww.statcan.gc.ca/pub/

[Smallc]

These Stats can figure suggest serious crimes in Canada are up not down

They don't say that at all. They say assaults are up, while all other violent crime is down.

[Borg]

Blah, blah, blah ......

Lieberals have fought the Conservatives tooth and nail to prevent any realistic "crime vs time" changes.

Canadian legal system is a joke - a total joke - and those that work in it for the most case not worth the sweat of a man's left testical.

Respect it and the judges that run it and the lawyers that work in it?

Hardly.

Overall - with a very few exceptions I would rather have a sister in a whore house than deal with anyone who works in the "legal" NOT "justice" system - at least she earns the money she makes.

Why is it like it is today? Look at your neighbour - hell - look in the mirror - you all will write and bitch here but the vast majority do not - and will never - tell their member of parliament - and for Christs sake we know the majority of Canuckleheads do not vote. Haw many wrote to their political masters about this? Likely none of you. So shut the hell up - you have no right to whine and complain unless you do something about it.

Instead you will all try to "one up" each other with little bits and bytes of chicken picking. Spend some time and go complain to someone who might actually be able to do something about it.

Or - more likely - you can all commiserate about "how bad it is" and "Oh what a shame".

Now have a nice day

Borg

Edited May 10, 2010 by Borg

[Smallc]

Blah, blah, blah ......

Lieberals have fought the Conservatives tooth and nail to prevent any realistic "crime vs time" changes.

What a bunch of bull. The Conservatives keep proroguing parliament. They keep fighting their own crime bills.

[Army Guy]

They don't say that at all. They say assaults are up, while all other violent crime is down.

Actually Smallc we both are wrong I should have said "serious assaults" and as well you should have said have remained stable or declined which would lead to the suggestion that not all crimes have declined but rather some have remained stable.....

[Wild Bill]

Actually Smallc we both are wrong I should have said "serious assaults" and as well you should have said have remained stable or declined which would lead to the suggestion that not all crimes have declined but rather some have remained stable.....

The fact that things have remained stable is cold comfort to any new victims! What's more, what is the timeline? Are things better or worse today than they were in the 70's, or the 60's? Have we gone in a positive or a negative direction?

[sharkman]

What matters to me is that experts at crime and rehabilitation deal with these issues.

Having longer sentences creates all sorts of other problems. All that longer sentences would achieve is to make you feel better and frankly I really don't give a crap about that.

I had to read this 2 times to make sure that he had indeed missed the obvious. The experts are the problem. They are the ones who have brought us to a place where criminals get laughable punishments for serious crime. They are the ones who told society that punishing children was wrong. You must treat them as an equal and explain the issue to them.

Now when youths start acting out the violence they see non-stop through gaming, movies and TV, these experts tell us not to spank them because violence begets violence. The truth is children have no boundaries anymore in a society where there is no right and wrong. At school the teachers are not allowed to do anything besides sending the kid to the office, that's if the kid will go.

The longer sentence comment is also questionable, and done with absolutely no facts. What are these problems exactly and could you provide some links? So is one to think from this that maybe 2 years for murder is okay after all, since if the criminal would create problems in the system if he was kept any longer?

The courts in Canada are full of these judgments. And for every judgment given there are several cases thrown out for the silliest things. Drug dealing is basically legal in Canada because of this. If your case actually does make it to the penalty phase, you get probation and community service for selling cocaine, meth and pot.

Anyway, nothing is going to change on this, people. You might as well quit wasting your time about it. The experts and the judges who hand out these penalties would need to be replaced across the board and Canada does not have judges not infected with this blight. So you have to watch out for yourself, and for heaven's sake, don't do something stupid like carry pepper spray, if you are attacked and use it, you'll face harsher penalties than the attacker.

[eyeball]

I had to read this 2 times to make sure that he had indeed missed the obvious. The experts are the problem. They are the ones who have brought us to a place where criminals get laughable punishments for serious crime. They are the ones who told society that punishing children was wrong. You must treat them as an equal and explain the issue to them.

The experts have brought us to a point where rehabilitation works better at preventing recidivism than harsh punishment.

Politicians, almost exclusively conservative one's, have simply brought us to a place where punishment is laughable. The war on drugs proves these people are worse than useless when it comes to preventing crime, if anything they seem to be intent on creating it.

[M.Dancer]

The only explanation I can come up with is that the officials who are handling his case are conservatives who know releasing him is guaranteed to galvanize the excitable classes.

I suspect there's more to this case than we're hearing. Perhaps the kid is related to a Conservative MP and as such he's getting preferential treatment. It's impossible to tell. All we can do is trust the government knows what it's doing.

That's why I half seriously wonder whether the people who are releasing him are trying to advance an agenda for a harsher justice system by producing an event that's guaranteed to galvanize people.

The experts have brought us to a point where rehabilitation works better at preventing recidivism than harsh punishment.

Politicians, almost exclusively conservative one's, have simply brought us to a place where punishment is laughable. The war on drugs proves these people are worse than useless when it comes to preventing crime, if anything they seem to be intent on creating it.

I am always amazed how you can effortlessly spew contradictory and illogical arguments.

You end your sputterings by claiming that conservatives are the ones responsible for a lax justice system and begin your exercise in illogic by claiming the reason is to excite the masses to press for a harsher system.

The humour is of course lost on you....

[Army Guy]

The fact that things have remained stable is cold comfort to any new victims!

Our justice system has long since forgotten the victim...Now we are more concerned about convicts rights...

What's more, what is the timeline?

1983 to 2008

Are things better or worse today than they were in the 70's, or the 60's? Have we gone in a positive or a negative direction?

In regards to serious assualts we've gone in a negative direction....

[eyeball]

I am always amazed how you can effortlessly spew contradictory and illogical arguments.

I am never surprised at your strawmen arguments.

You end your sputterings by claiming that conservatives are the ones responsible for a lax justice system and begin your exercise in illogic by claiming the reason is to excite the masses to press for a harsher system.

The humour is of course lost on you....

Your the one it's lost on, did you miss where I said I "half seriously wonder"...? That said, I wouldn't put it past social conservatives for one minute to try and manipulate things and pervert the system from the inside.

I didn't say conservatives are responsible for a lax justice system. I said they are useless at preventing crime.

[nicky10013]

The fact that things have remained stable is cold comfort to any new victims! What's more, what is the timeline? Are things better or worse today than they were in the 70's, or the 60's? Have we gone in a positive or a negative direction?

Our crime rates have been falling for 30 years. We must be doing something right.

[M.Dancer]

I didn't say conservatives are responsible for a lax justice system. I said they are useless at preventing crime.

Yes you did. You said it a couple of hours ago.

Politicians, almost exclusively conservative one's, have simply brought us to a place where punishment is laughable.

[sharkman]

Dancer, have you ever thought of becoming a judge?

[M.Dancer]

Dancer, have you ever thought of becoming a judge?

Yes but in my mind all the girls are beauty queens...

[Born Free]

Our crime rates have been falling for 30 years. We must be doing something right.

Anyone care to comment on recidivism rates over the decades? That might give us a better clue about the success (or lack of it) in the justice system.