Self-defence in Canada

[OpenGambit]

Sorry, you could not be more wrong IMO. First the legal fees likely ran into the 10's of thousands, that is life changing financial punishment to the majority of people.

Second they could have investigated WITHOUT charging him. That way they do their job and he is not punished. But in these cases that is not how it works. They did not find him innocent they charged him and THEN figured out that they were not going to win (more like no contest). Not even about right or wrong, it was about it does not look like they will win so they quit....

Even under castle law, you can still be charged, they still investigate but the actual victim has rights.

and thats the prosecutor's fault because?

This is exactly why I left Justice. You bust your *** for no pay, do the right thing (which this guy obviously did), and get ******* out anyway because there are fools out there that think that somehow you have charging authority.

Better to spend my life in private practice instead. To think that anyone would take a pay cut to listen to this crap is insane.

 

[nobbie48]

All this case tells me is if someone breaks into my house I am better off killing him and dumping the body somewhere. I'd most likely never get caught as I doubt the thief would tell anyone where they were going, and there would be no motive or ties linking me and him.

That's what inadequate property rights will do. If police/law is seen as ineffective, then people take matters in their own hands. Like I witnessed in Indonesia when villagers tied up a scooter thief, pulled an old tire around him, doused him in gas and lit him up -- all because the cops were corrupt and ineffective. If you want a society without vigilantism, then have laws that protect citizens, not criminals.

Re dumping the body, I have often wondered if some of the troubled youths we hear of disappearing didn't go this route. Their last picture being on a milk carton.

The Indonesian situation could be a reasonable knee jerk reaction for a major physical assault but there is something wrong when one does that for a theft. Brutal punishment doesn't work in the long run and if you're going to kill someone don't make a spectacle of it. That is sicker than the original crime.

 

[01cbr]

Re dumping the body, I have often wondered if some of the troubled youths we hear of disappearing didn't go this route. Their last picture being on a milk carton.

The Indonesian situation could be a reasonable knee jerk reaction for a major physical assault but there is something wrong when one does that for a theft. Brutal punishment doesn't work in the long run and if you're going to kill someone don't make a spectacle of it. That is sicker than the original crime.

I know a guy who was caught stealing scrap metal. He was held at gun point, tied and blind folded, and left in a shed. The guy tired to get 10 g's from the guys parents to let him go.

Im sure had things gone badly he would have ended up a missing person.

 

[Motorcycle Mike]

Oh I agree with you that is sick -- I don't agree with vigilante extreme justice like what happens in Indonesia and elsewhere, I'm just saying that is what happens when laws and police are seen as ineffectual and people take the matters into their own hands.

If I am the victim of a crime, I should have the utmost confidence in asking for support from the police - that is what they are hired for. I should not have to hesitate or consider not involving the law out of fear of being accused and/or prosecuted myself. This case and others like it tell me that I cannot be confident in calling the police if I am a victim, I am better off not calling them and dealing with the issue myself.

Re dumping the body, I have often wondered if some of the troubled youths we hear of disappearing didn't go this route. Their last picture being on a milk carton.

The Indonesian situation could be a reasonable knee jerk reaction for a major physical assault but there is something wrong when one does that for a theft. Brutal punishment doesn't work in the long run and if you're going to kill someone don't make a spectacle of it. That is sicker than the original crime.

 

[BusaBob]

why can't the government "investigate" without charging the citizen?
why does one have to necessitate the other?

in regard to your last post: I believe the criticism is not of the individual prosecutor, but a system that is structured in a way as to have allowed this situation to have occurred.

personally, it's my opinion that the system did not "work" if someone who is clearly defending himself/family/property is subjected to this kind of prosecution.

yes the Crown dropped the charges because there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.... thats what they are supposed to do, now you have a problem with that because??

yeah. the guy spent legal fees, he is out cash, that sucks. But the bigger picture is that the state can't just not investigate every time someone says self defence, thats how you get the George Zimmermans.

 

[nobbie48]

yes the Crown dropped the charges because there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.... thats what they are supposed to do, now you have a problem with that because??

yeah. the guy spent legal fees, he is out cash, that sucks. But the bigger picture is that the state can't just not investigate every time someone says self defence, thats how you get the George Zimmermans.

Justice is different things to different people. Oddly it seems that people that people not involved with a case have more revenge in their voices than the real victims. "If that was my family that he hurt I'd.... (Enter list of cruel punishments).
Very often the victim just wants the ordeal over. Maybe the slow process even helps by letting the victims cool down from the knee-jerk mode.

It bothers me however that you sweep the financial hardship under the carpet with a broad brush. To some people ten or twenty grand is a setback. To others it means losing their home. I have difficulty shrugging that off.

I know someone that is fighting workplace violence. They have lost a small fortune ($30-$50K) in wages so far and legal expenses plus health costs both financial and physical. If future costs could be calculated the costs are obscene. The ALLEGED perpetrator is still working and drawing full wages as he is innocent until proven guilty so can't be punished yet. He has enough points to retire with full pension so even when (hopefully) convicted he will not suffer financially. The nature of the crime is such that jail time is unlikely, probation of some sort at best. He just spends more time at the cottage.

The victim at best gets to start life over again after five years.

If anyone thinks that justice is like restarting a computer they have been watching too many reruns of Leave it to Beaver or Love Boat.

The delays are a sore spot but one always has to consider the shoe on the other foot. If you had a dispute with a neighbour and the next morning his tires were slashed would it be a good thing that, based on his opinion, the police immediately arrested and held you until they found the person that actually did the deed?

At best, justice sucks.

PS There are those on this forum that advocate challenging every charge regardless of how valid the charge is and how blatent the offence. Thanks for pluging up the courts so the innocent have to wait ages to be cleared.

 

[sircastic]

Oh I agree with you that is sick -- I don't agree with vigilante extreme justice like what happens in Indonesia and elsewhere, I'm just saying that is what happens when laws and police are seen as ineffectual and people take the matters into their own hands.

If I am the victim of a crime, I should have the utmost confidence in asking for support from the police - that is what they are hired for. I should not have to hesitate or consider not involving the law out of fear of being accused and/or prosecuted myself. This case and others like it tell me that I cannot be confident in calling the police if I am a victim, I am better off not calling them and dealing with the issue myself.

It's the public's responsibility to uphold the law the police are paid representatives of the public to perform this function on a full time basis. The problem with self defence / defending property and calling the police is that they will not be there in time to prevent injury or the crime from occurring. They show up to ask questions in order to complete the paperwork for the legal system after the damage is done.

The legal system is also supposed to fair, accessible and efficient. Accessible and efficient it is not, I do like to think it's fair and reasonable for the most part (though I may be looking through rose coloured glasses). The current system is complicated beyond reason, I suspect so that the general public is required to hire representation.

 

[jawan]

alot of our cop friends say that if there is a breakin or anything like that...dial 911 tell them someones there you think they're going to kill u and the family, give the address and hang up. the guys in ur house no ****ing clue what he is going to do or why he's there...

we had a situation a few years ago where one of the electricians we had broke into our house late at night. He was fired a couple days before by his company, we have a german shepherd. Him being the loyal guard dog he is went a bit him and held his arm till we all came in and pulled him off. Animal control came, monitored him and said we may have to destroy him bc he is an aggressive dog. Thankfully that didn't happen, he didn't have rabies he's friendly with us and kids. The ****ing idiot who broke in and tried stealing the copper sued us....wait for it.....we lost. We actually had to pay him for lost wages bc he had another job and could no longer finish. ****ing bull ****...it was 2 1/2 years of that crap

Ian thompson got the wrong end of the stick, he protected his family and then got charged. The gun groups rallied behind him, got him the best lawyers, there were donations everything...if he didn't have all that prosecution would've walked right over him.

 

[RockerGuy]

alot of our cop friends say that if there is a breakin or anything like that...dial 911 tell them someones there you think they're going to kill u and the family, give the address and hang up. the guys in ur house no ****ing clue what he is going to do or why he's there...

we had a situation a few years ago where one of the electricians we had broke into our house late at night. He was fired a couple days before by his company, we have a german shepherd. Him being the loyal guard dog he is went a bit him and held his arm till we all came in and pulled him off. Animal control came, monitored him and said we may have to destroy him bc he is an aggressive dog. Thankfully that didn't happen, he didn't have rabies he's friendly with us and kids. The ****ing idiot who broke in and tried stealing the copper sued us....wait for it.....we lost. We actually had to pay him for lost wages bc he had another job and could no longer finish. ****ing bull ****...it was 2 1/2 years of that crap

Ian thompson got the wrong end of the stick, he protected his family and then got charged. The gun groups rallied behind him, got him the best lawyers, there were donations everything...if he didn't have all that prosecution would've walked right over him.

I like how they blame the puppy. Why does he need to be put down? That theif should be put down

Sent from my phone using my paws

 

[RetroGrouch]

I like how they blame the puppy. Why does he need to be put down? That theif should be put down

Because in our country, any animal that injures or kills a human is automatically sentenced to death.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Sorry, you could not be more wrong IMO. First the legal fees likely ran into the 10's of thousands, that is life changing financial punishment to the majority of people.

Second they could have investigated WITHOUT charging him. That way they do their job and he is not punished. But in these cases that is not how it works. They did not find him innocent they charged him and THEN figured out that they were not going to win (more like no contest). Not even about right or wrong, it was about it does not look like they will win so they quit....

Even under castle law, you can still be charged, they still investigate but the actual victim has rights.

Exactly! I'm sure they often do those punitive charges even though there's no prospect of conviction because they know that it will financially ruin their victim anyway so sending the victim to serve time would just be a bonus. You think the homeowner will ever get that money back?

Only an idiot thinks this kind of thing can be figured out in a week. Especially with the budget that our provincial crowns work with.

Imagine the budget that your typical homeowner has to work with.

 

[RockerGuy]

Because in our country, any animal that injures or kills a human is automatically sentenced to death.

Going by that logic, shouldnt that apply to murderers?

Sent from my phone using my paws

 

[BusaBob]

...The ****ing idiot who broke in and tried stealing the copper sued us....wait for it.....we lost. We actually had to pay him for lost wages bc he had another job and could no longer finish. ****ing bull ****...it was 2 1/2 years of that crap

Ian thompson got the wrong end of the stick, he protected his family and then got charged. The gun groups rallied behind him, got him the best lawyers, there were donations everything...if he didn't have all that prosecution would've walked right over him.

Another example of how our "justice" system is all *** backwards.
Blind Justice <-- ain't that the truth.
(willfully stupid too)

 

[FiReSTaRT]

I don't see any part of this statement that is productive or changes the realities of the provincial office.
You are just being a dick.

I'm being a dick, how? By pointing out that innocent people get charged, sometimes purposely? That they don't have tax dollars to piss away at will? That a criminal defense would result in MAJOR financial hardships, possibly financial ruin, for a great majority of people making an honest buck? If that ain't actin' like a dick, I dunno what is

P.S. You may wanna keep those insults in check.. You seem to be calling me a dick every time I offer a view contrary to yours. While I'm not turbodish with a cursor purposely hovering over the "report" button, one of those posts will be seen by a mod if they happen to be browsing the thread.

 

[RockerGuy]

I'm being a dick, how? By pointing out that innocent people get charged, sometimes purposely? That they don't have tax dollars to piss away at will? That a criminal defense would result in MAJOR financial hardships, possibly financial ruin, for a great majority of people making an honest buck? If that ain't actin' like a dick, I dunno what is

P.S. You may wanna keep those insults in check.. You seem to be calling me a dick every time I offer a view contrary to yours. While I'm not turbodish with a cursor purposely hovering over the "report" button, one of those posts will be seen by a mod if they happen to be browsing the thread.

He's got a boner for u

Sent from my phone using my paws

 

[omnivore]

Only an idiot thinks this kind of thing can be figured out in a week. Especially with the budget that our provincial crowns work with.

You can't be relied on to think this thru rationally. Of course you think this is justice. Being a lawyer, your colleagues (possibly you-I dunno what type of law you work in) rely on this type of legal bullying for large income potential.

Or, how about this? If you really believe you are doing justice's work, the lawyers only get paid after a trial, win or loose. If charges are dropped before, no one gets paid.

The cops shouldn't be charging you, then collecting evidence if they can. It needs to be the other way round, and if they can't collect evidence, leave well enough alone, as the unfortunate possibility of ruining an innocent person's life is real and clear.

Ten yrs ago, my younger brother was arrested on a bogus charge, had to hire a high end attorney, and it cost him more than $21,000 in 8 months in lawyers fees, appearances, etc, only to have the Crown realize, just before a trial date, that it couldn't make a case stick becasue they had no evidence and no witness testimony, and dropped everything.
People like you would say "See, justice prevailed, and your brother is free!"
Who is gonna give his money back? How can he erase the community's memory? They all read his name in the paper as being charged. Doesn't matter that he wasn't convicted. The community still looks at you different.

What if a banker or insurance investor is wrongfully charged with theft? Or a teacher wrongfully charged with assault? Or any husband wrongfully charged with rape?
The wrong type of bogus charge could have you loose your career, loose your wife and kids possibly......and in the end, after spending a small fortune, when charges get dropped, you are supposed to be happy about it all becasue you're free?
Please. It's true that the "haves" don't see the world in the same light as the "have-nots".

 

[BusaBob]

well said!

 

[FiReSTaRT]

well said!

Amen.. Who here wouldn't feel the impact of $20,000 for years? I'm sure there are a few who make good coin but for most of us, that's big bucks. And that seems pretty low.. For a firearms charge I'm guessing 30g's minimum. Most of us making an honest buck make too much for legal aid, but would get ruined once the expenses go into tens of thousands.

 

[OpenGambit]

You can't be relied on to think this thru rationally.

I have said before that the criminal legal system is unworkable if the crown has to pay legal fees at a matter of course (without a malicious prosecution tort). This has been explained before in more detailed posts. I don't feel the need to retype it.

The crown has nothing to do with the cops, that I have said before also.

the provincial crowns in Ontario get paid essentially only 3 days out of a full week of work. every week. For their entire career. they deal with bombs being put in their cars (organized crime trials a few years back) and are among the most dedicated of the civil service (because they would have to be to put in the same hours I do but get paid half as much), and at the end of the day. You have a bunch of tards that have no idea what their job is like making impossible demands on their resources, holding them accountable for something thats not their job (laying charges), and generally suggesting things without thinking out the implications of what that means for the entire system.

And yes, that is dickish.

 

[OpenGambit]

People like you would say "See, justice prevailed, and your brother is free!"

What I actually said was that it isn't ideal. At no point did I endorse the events. I simply responded that the alternatives being proposed were not feasible or would not make sense in other situations, and is horrible policy.

Those suggestions included:
1. not investigating the events
2. crown paying legal fees at a matter of course (previously explained)
3. castle doctrine (which doesn't change anything)

But you can make things up if you want.

All anyone here can do is look at one situation with imperfect information and become apparent policy experts. But its obvious that very few people actually think out the implications of what they suggest. Thats why you guys don't get to make the law.

And the suggestion that I benefit at all from this one way or another is straight up laughable and not based in reality.