Canadian justice system is a farce

[blackbird]

"The 79-year-old London, Ont., woman convicted of driving her car into a troop of girl guides, killing an eight-year-old girl and injuring seven others in 2021, was sentenced Tuesday to two years less a day of house arrest, followed by three years of probation that includes a driving ban."

79-year-old who drove into girl guides, killing 8-year-old in London, sentenced to 2 years of house arrest (msn.com)

[ExFlyer]

A very sad event.

Not harsh enough for you?

You want to put a frail 79 year old woman in prison for an accident? 2 years house arrest plus forbidding from driving for 3 more years is not an unusual punishment.

 

Edited August 20, 2024 by ExFlyer

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

A very sad event.

Not harsh enough for you?

You want to put a frail 79 year old woman in prison for an accident? 2 years house arrest plus forbidding from driving for 3 more years is not an unusual punishment.

 

If it was an accident then she woudln't have been convicted. Story says she was going over 120.  I dunno, it does feel a little light to me.  Killing children is a big deal and her age doesn't make that less true.  Part of punishment is the punishment to the offender but part of it is also to be a warning to others that the crime has serious consequences. House arrest doesn't sound that serious to me. 

[ExFlyer]

13 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

If it was an accident then she woudln't have been convicted. Story says she was going over 120.  I dunno, it does feel a little light to me.  Killing children is a big deal and her age doesn't make that less true.  Part of punishment is the punishment to the offender but part of it is also to be a warning to others that the crime has serious consequences. House arrest doesn't sound that serious to me. 

There is always more to a headline.

The judge had all the information and they decided the punishment.

She was not the first or last to not go to jail for vehicular deaths.

[herbie]

Move to Alabama you could lock her up for 300 years.

Just another example of why that Judge is a Judge and you're not.

[blackbird]

My interest is more with the justice system in general.  The system in general is a joke.  Repeat offenders, some dangerous, are constantly arrested for shoplifting and immediately released.  Some businesses are giving up because it has cost them thousands of dollars in lost merchandise and the courts do nothing except let them out to repeat again.

This case involved killing a young child and injuring a number of others.  Nobody knows the real reason it happened.  But the court or judge found it to be negligence.  I don't know.   But it still sets a precedent.  

I am more concerned about how the justice system treats drunk drivers.

How often do drunk drivers kill people and get off with light sentences?  That is common.

The typical sentence in Canada for drunk drivers killing someone is 4 to 6 years.  They also can out after serving one-third of their sentence.

"The short sentences imposed in some cases of impaired driving causing death or bodily harm, the generous credit given for pre-conviction imprisonment and the fact that many of these offenders are paroled after serving only one-third of their sentence has generated controversy and angered victims of impaired driving."   -MADD

Edited August 20, 2024 by blackbird

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Move to Alabama you could lock her up for 300 years.

Just another example of why that Judge is a Judge and you're not.

You are a bit of an lefty extremist.   

"Petronella McNorgan, a 79-year-old retired teacher, was convicted in April of one count of criminal negligence causing death and seven counts of criminal negligence causing bodily harm. "

That's what the judge ruled, not me.  Sounds like pretty serious charges.  But no jail time at all.  

Perhaps it was caused by a mental lapse.  In that case, maybe she should not have been found guilty of any of those charges.  Perhaps she should be tested by professionals to see if there is some kind of mental issue that caused the accident, that is, caused her to push the gas pedal instead of the brake.

Edited August 20, 2024 by blackbird

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Move to Alabama you could lock her up for 300 years.

Just another example of why that Judge is a Judge and you're not.

Wouldn't it have been a judge in alabama that would lock her up for 300 years?  Does that mean he's more judge than this judge? 

I'm not sure you thought this through. 

[ExFlyer]

13 hours ago, blackbird said:

You are a bit of an lefty extremist.   

"Petronella McNorgan, a 79-year-old retired teacher, was convicted in April of one count of criminal negligence causing death and seven counts of criminal negligence causing bodily harm. "

That's what the judge ruled, not me.  Sounds like pretty serious charges.  But no jail time at all.  

Perhaps it was caused by a mental lapse.  In that case, maybe she should not have been found guilty of any of those charges.  Perhaps she should be tested by professionals to see if there is some kind of mental issue that caused the accident, that is, caused her to push the gas pedal instead of the brake.

First time you have ever used common sense and possibility in a post of yours.

As you were not in court and do not know the extent of the evidence and investigation, you are not aware of why the judge made that judgment.

While the incident was a true tragedy, the sentence may have been as a result of the investigation and circumstance.

This has nothing to do with lefties or extremists it has to do with actual investigation and evidence and perhaps even the health status of the accused. Judges take al those things into consideration when sentencing.

[eyeball]

9 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Judges take al those things into consideration when sentencing.

I think what blackbird is pining for is giving greater consideration and weight to vengeance.

[ExFlyer]

33 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I think what blackbird is pining for is giving greater consideration and weight to vengeance.

Perhaps but his goof book has lots to say about vengeance and none of it is up to him or a judge.

https://www.openbible.info/topics/vengeance_is_mine_says_the_lord

While I think what happened is a huge tragedy, the 79 year old woman may have had issues or physical problems that were not in the articles. Jail may not have been a viable option.

 

[blackbird]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

I think what blackbird is pining for is giving greater consideration and weight to vengeance.

Do you think 4 to 6 years for a drunk driver who kills someone is reasonable?  They also often get out after one-third of their sentence.

[eyeball]

32 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Do you think 4 to 6 years for a drunk driver who kills someone is reasonable?  They also often get out after one-third of their sentence.

I think it's more reasonable for a secular judge to decide that. Pious holier than thou bible thumpers not so much.

Edited August 22, 2024 by eyeball

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

I think it's more reasonable for a secular judge to decide that. Pious holier than thou bible thumpers not so much.

Evading the question.  You don't fool anyone.  You obviously don't want to say so you can claim to be non judgmental of anything.  You think that makes you look holier than thou. 

 According to you, nobody can have an opinion about whether the justice system is working correctly or not.  You express your opinion on everything on here and judge me.  So while you say you don't judge the justice system but you judge me?  Isn't that hypocrisy at it's worse?

Edited August 22, 2024 by blackbird

[eyeball]

28 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Evading the question.  You don't fool anyone.  You obviously don't want to say so you can claim to be non judgmental of anything.  You think that makes you look holier than thou.

There could be times when 20 years is appropriate. I'm not qualified to judge and neither are you.

30 minutes ago, blackbird said:

According to you, nobody can have an opinion about whether the justice system is working correctly or not.  

Sure they can.

32 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You express your opinion on everything on here and judge me

Not on everything but in my opinion you're a dingbat because the seriousness with which you take your belief system is crazy.

35 minutes ago, blackbird said:

So while you say you don't judge the justice system but you judge me?  Isn't that hypocrisy at it's worse?

I have little reason to judge the justice system in this case and certainly not because of your opinions on it. I simply gave my opinion on what's motivating you... which is a desire for vengeance as opposed to justice.

[CdnFox]

32 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There could be times when 20 years is appropriate. I'm not qualified to judge and neither are you.

 

That's not really accurate. And that is a major problem with our current system.

Justice must always be downstream of society in the public. The public is absolutely qualified to say what is just and what is not just. Judges are there to make it consistent and to apply legal principles. But that does not mean they are in any way shape or form better equipped to determine what is or is not appropriate as far as suitable punishments for a crime. That is up to society. Society expresses this through its elected members who make the laws and are judged by the public.

Imagining that somehow judges have some super ability to determine moral or appropriate societal responses and laws is not true and flies in the face of a democratic process.  

The people absolutely should have a say in what is or is not appropriate punishment for crimes. People are fully qualified to say what is and is not appropriate. People run the country, not judges.

Judges are just there to make sure that everybody is treated the same in accordance with the laws that are passed by the parliament which is elected by the people. When judges step outside of that and become deluded into thinking they are morally superior than everybody else you have a major problem and your democracy is threatened.

[blackbird]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

which is a desire for vengeance as opposed to justice.

No, you are making a false assumption.  Most rational people believe there should be appropriate justice which includes jail time for criminal acts.  It appears there are lots of liberals or progressives that don't believe in justice.  That's why we have ridiculous small sentences for serious crimes.  The liberals also are so soft on crime that they let repeat offenders out on bail immediately in many or most cases.  This has been in the news almost daily.  The business owners are fed up and some even considering shutting down their businesses because it is costing them so much money.

Any normal, civilized person should be angry about the terrible justice system that lets repeat offenders and dangerous offenders out on bail constantly.  This was raised last year by the premiers with the federal government and we all thought the government was going to do something about it.  But they apparently did nothing.   It also gives them small sentences or no jail time.   That is the issue.  We should be able to express our opinions about that in a free country.

Edited August 22, 2024 by blackbird

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, blackbird said:

It appears there are lots of liberals or progressives that don't believe in justice. 

Now you're making a false assumption. I'd definitely like to see more serious sentences for white collar criminals.

[blackbird]

We now see a report of a suspect that allegedly murdered several people as part of intimate partner violence.

He was banned by the court from going near his partner, but violated the order a number of times.

The police seized a number of weapons before the killings, but did not know he still had one gun hidden somewhere.

How is it he allegedly made a number of threatening acts, had weapons, violated court orders to stay away from the partner, but still was not locked up?  So he was allegedly able to murder several people because he was allowed to be out free.

The answer is the justice system is a farce and is not protecting Canadians.

Edited August 22, 2024 by blackbird

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Now you're making a false assumption. I'd definitely like to see more serious sentences for white collar criminals.

No you don't. If you did you'd have condemned Justin Trudeau left right and center for ages. Instead you blamed his actions on harper not being Tough Enough (???)

 

[suds]

On 8/20/2024 at 6:22 PM, blackbird said:

Perhaps it was caused by a mental lapse.  In that case, maybe she should not have been found guilty of any of those charges.  Perhaps she should be tested by professionals to see if there is some kind of mental issue that caused the accident, that is, caused her to push the gas pedal instead of the brake.

Crash data that was downloaded from the vehicle (taken in the 5 second interval before the air bags deployed) shows the gas pedal 99% depressed and the brake pedal untouched. It certainly sounds like a mental issue.

[eyeball]

36 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No you don't. If you did you'd have condemned Justin Trudeau left right and center for ages. Instead you blamed his actions on harper not being Tough Enough (???)

 

You're being ridiculous, Harper isn't responsible for what Trudeau did.

[blackbird]

30 minutes ago, suds said:

Crash data that was downloaded from the vehicle (taken in the 5 second interval before the air bags deployed) shows the gas pedal 99% depressed and the brake pedal untouched. It certainly sounds like a mental issue.

Yes, I pressed the gas pedal once when I meant to press the brake, but only for a couple seconds and there was no danger as  result.  It can happen.  If a person panics and presses the gas instead of the brake, I can see how a serious accident could happen.

[CdnFox]

27 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You're being ridiculous, Harper isn't responsible for what Trudeau did.

You certainly said he was. Again and again. I was the one that argued he wasn't. You demanded that it was all harper's fault because he didn't pass laws to prevent justin Trudeau from doing what he tried to do. While at the same time ignoring the fact that Justin got caught trying to break the law that harper put in place so actually harper did succeed.

Now that you've been shown to be a complete fool on the subject you have changed your tune. But you have on many many occasions blamed Harper for Justin Trudeau's activities. You certainly don't seem to blame Justin for them

[suds]

9 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Yes, I pressed the gas pedal once when I meant to press the brake, but only for a couple seconds and there was no danger as  result.  It can happen.  If a person panics and presses the gas instead of the brake, I can see how a serious accident could happen.

Something like that happened to me once also.  I was driving along wearing a big clumsy pair of boots and my boot on the accelerator got caught behind the back of the brake  peddle when I wanted to apply the brakes. Now I'm very particular on the footwear I'm wearing while driving especially in the winter time.