Canadian Bureaucratic Lunacy

[August1991]

When a convicted murderer escaped from a New Brunswick prison this week, officials refused to release his photograph, citing departmental privacy policy.

Gary Gormley, 39, was serving a life sentence for second-degree murder, and is considered violent.

Under its privacy rules, a photo of a convict can't be released unless the inmate gives permission and signs a release form, said Corrections Canada. Even though he broke out of jail Thursday, Gormley still has a right to privacy as an inmate.

THAT'S POLICY

"Unfortunately, that's the policy we are dealing with right now. Until changes are made, we have to respect it," said Maurice LeBlanc of the Westmoreland Institution in Dorchester.

The RCMP eventually released the photo after a media request.

The delay has angered people in this prison town.

"I believe we have the right to know who is free in our community, so if we sight him he can be reported," said Melvin Goodland, Dorchester's mayor.

LeBlanc says Corrections may change its policy.

CanWest

Maybe Corrections Canada should get all new prisoners to sign a waiver form indicating that if they escape custody, the prison has the right to release photographs.

Edited September 9, 2007 by August1991

[betsy]

I think the safety of the public from convicted people like this guy trumps a convict's rights to privacy. It should.

Edited September 9, 2007 by betsy

[old_bold&cold]

I can only hope that this will be stamped out real fast and the person who invocated this stupidity, either gets retrained or removed from their position. It does not pass the smell test or any other. This was a stupid civil servant, showing they the can get just as dumb as some of the NDP members.

[jbg]

CanWest

Maybe Corrections Canada should get all new prisoners to sign a waiver form indicating that if they escape custody, the prison has the right to release photographs.

I think the safety of the public from convicted people like this guy trumps a convict's rights to privacy. It should.

I don't know about you. I think the rights of an escapee should trump everyone else's. Thoughts?

Edited September 9, 2007 by jbg

[Visionseeker]

I think we will find that the proper protocol was not respected. Yes, Correctional Services has a duty to protect the privacy of inmates. But in the case of an escape from custody, CSC necessarily provides the RCMP (or other local law enforcement) with the necessary identifiers. The police can then release whatever they deem necessary to secure the inmate's capture.

Edited September 9, 2007 by Visionseeker

[August1991]

Yes, Correctional Services has a duty to protect the privacy of inmates.

Really?

[Visionseeker]

Really?

Really.

[August1991]

So Visionseeker, you think that prisoners should have private rooms and showers? They should be entitled to private visits with family and friends?

How far would you take this right to privacy?

If Clifford Olson wants to correspond with someone, should we respect his right to privacy?

[Visionseeker]

So Visionseeker, you think that prisoners should have private rooms and showers? They should be entitled to private visits with family and friends?

How far would you take this right to privacy?

If Clifford Olson wants to correspond with someone, should we respect his right to privacy?

What I think is immaterial. But the statutes and federal privacy legislation are clear on the subject.

I suggest you de-personify your arguments. Your post is arguably offensive.

[jennie]

What I think is immaterial. But the statutes and federal privacy legislation are clear on the subject.

I suggest you de-personify your arguments. Your post is arguably offensive.

Well said, vseeker!

tsk tsk Aug91, you neglected to learn what the laws are before trashing them. All attacks ... no facts: That's a number one booboo on a boardboard ... faux-pas on a forum ... messup on a message board ... tsk tsk

Corrections CANNOT release the photo to the public, but only to the RCMP, on request. It is RCMP discretion whether to release it to the public, not Corrections.

The news slut asked the wrong source then flipped out when they couldn't accommodate that day's IMMEDIATE deadline,

and made it a story about Corrections"refusal" to produce that which they could not legally produce.

[jbg]

Corrections CANNOT release the photo to the public, but only to the RCMP, on request. It is RCMP discretion whether to release it to the public, not Corrections.

That may be technically true but it is realistically assinine. That gives an escapted hardened criminal more protection than an eleven year old making a Myspace entry has.

[Argus]

That may be technically true but it is realistically assinine. That gives an escapted hardened criminal more protection than an eleven year old making a Myspace entry has.

The philosophy of Corrections Canada over the past fifteen odd years has been one of embracing and understanding the "behavioural errors" of prisoners, and ensuring that their "clients" receive as much love, respect and help as can be provided. A series of very liberal (Liberal) commissioners have done their best to ensure earlier and earlier releases with fewer regulations and less oversight, and to provide their 'clients" with as much in the way of educational, skill training and entertainment material as they can make use of. And to restrain the baser instincts of those Neanderthal guard types who appear to lack the neccessary liberal arts degrees to understand the problems of "clients". For example, guards were denied stab prove vests because this might be seen as too confrontational.

Corrections Canada has been caught lying about recidivism rates, about release rates, and about violence in prisons. I think the higher ups see themselves as allies of the prisoners and opponents of the police and guards.

People should read some of the articles by Michael Harris exposing the massive fraud on the public which is the prison system.

[Pliny]

Good quote, Argus!

“Public opinion, I am sorry to say, will bear a great deal of nonsense. There is scarcely any absurdity so gross, whether in religion, politics, science or manners, which it will not bear.” Ralph Waldo Emerson.

I see a lot of politicians representing public opinion. Isn't it just painful when someone says they speak for the people. Their opinion becomes more important than other people's opinion that way. I see a few posters here hold that their opinions are public opinions. That implies of course that they have no personal opinion that is arrived at without consultation of public opinion. In the end, the only opinion that matters is the one that makes the laws.

As a comment on the subject of the thread, I don't think Bureaucratic Lunacy of this sort is peculiar to Canada, it is more a disease of bureaucracy in any government.

[Posit]

In the end, the only opinion that matters is the one that makes the laws.

CORRECTION:"In the end, the only opinion that matters is the one that interprets the laws.

[Denny]

I think it should be obvious that when your are incarcerated, you lose a lot of your personal rights. You have shown yourself to be a "non-player" by society's rules, so you should not benefit from society's freedoms either.

[Denny]

I think it should be obvious that when your are incarcerated, you lose a lot of your personal rights. You have shown yourself to be a "non-player" by society's rules, so you should not benefit from society's freedoms either.

[bk59]

I think it should be obvious that when your are incarcerated, you lose a lot of your personal rights. You have shown yourself to be a "non-player" by society's rules, so you should not benefit from society's freedoms either.

Those found guilty should & do lose a lot of their personal rights. This does not mean that they have no rights. Most of the people in prison have to reintegrate into society. It does no one any good to treat these people like animals and then expect them to magically accept society's rules when they are released.

As for the privacy issue... I find the article in the opening post a bit suspicious. It is dated Saturday, September 8, 2007. And yet here is a CBC article dated Friday, September 7, 2007 that quite clearly has a picture of the escaped convict: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/sto...ey-running.html

To me it seems like jennie might be right. Someone asked Corrections Canada for a photo when they had already given one to the proper authorities (I'm assuming the RCMP). For all we know it may have already been released to the media when this person asked Corrections Canada for the photo. Either way, it is the responsibility of the RCMP to release the photo, not Corrections Canada. I have to wonder why this problem hasn't been brought to light before. It seems more like an inexperienced reporter than anything else, especially since I haven't seen that aspect of the story anywhere else.

I really don't think Corrections Canada should just be giving out photos of inmates simply because the media asked for them. Perhaps a beneficial change would be to allow Corrections Canada and the RCMP to coordinate their news releases and give them to the media at the same time whenever a prisoner escaped.

[WestViking]

Those found guilty should & do lose a lot of their personal rights. This does not mean that they have no rights. Most of the people in prison have to reintegrate into society. It does no one any good to treat these people like animals and then expect them to magically accept society's rules when they are released.

Prison inmates are not treated as animals and never have been in Canada. It is reasonable to expect prison inmates to follow the rules of the Correctional Service. I have no respect whatever for the threat that a prison inmate will eventually be released. If they do not obey the law on release they return to prison on new charges. Society does not owe the convicted criminal anything more than a bed, clothing, three meals a day and appropriate medical care.

Edited September 12, 2007 by WestViking

[bk59]

Prison inmates are not treated as animals and never have been in Canada. It is reasonable to expect prison inmates to follow the rules of the Correctional Service. I have no respect whatever for the threat that a prison inmate will eventually be released. If they do not obey the law on release they return to prison on new charges. Society does not owe the convicted criminal anything more than a bed, clothing, three meals a day and appropriate medical care.

Interesting that you called it "the threat that a prison inmate will be released."

No, inmates are not treated like animals. But sentiments like "you should not benefit from society's freedoms" can lead to that result.

Society owes it to itself to try to rehabilitate inmates so that they can rejoin society as productive members. Law abiding citizens do not cost the state money to prosecute them and house them in prisons. Not to mention the costs of the crimes themselves. Agreed, those who re-offend should (obviously) be prosecuted & imprisoned. But I hesitate to say that we owe prisoners only the bare minimum. If an inmate can finish his high school diploma and therefore make it easier for him to find a job when he is released, isn't that in society's best interest?

[Pliny]

No, inmates are not treated like animals. But sentiments like "you should not benefit from society's freedoms" can lead to that result.

Society owes it to itself to try to rehabilitate inmates so that they can rejoin society as productive members. Law abiding citizens do not cost the state money to prosecute them and house them in prisons. Not to mention the costs of the crimes themselves. Agreed, those who re-offend should (obviously) be prosecuted & imprisoned. But I hesitate to say that we owe prisoners only the bare minimum. If an inmate can finish his high school diploma and therefore make it easier for him to find a job when he is released, isn't that in society's best interest?

Who is society? Why should it (they, we, us) owe anything to anybody? Who should determine what is owed to who and who should work to pay for what is owed? Should anyone work if society guarantees to owe everyone a living?

How can you tell if a person has been rehabilitated?

Criminals deserve the basics of food, clothing, shelter and health care, and the only reason that I believe they should have that, is in the event that they have been wrongly convicted. They should be made to work in the same way that I am made to work to help pay for their welfare. It is too close, in Canada, to the point where it may seem to some people that it is not really worthwhile to be working.

If an inmate can finish his high school diploma and therefore make it easier for him to find a job when he is released, isn't that in society's best interest?

If he gets an education with the diploma, I'll agree.