Interesting ruling in Canada

[SirMyghin]

Thought some folks here might want to discuss this one:

Newmarket man declared dangerous offender - thestar.com

It was an interesting case, the man planned to abduct, torture and rape a child, which is alleged a friend of his' daughter. He attempted several times but the mother was around. He was caught at a school in a bush with items listed in the article (duct tape, wire, a rasor blade, etc).

The interesting part was, due to the immense amount of premeditation they found in his journal, when they caught him (before a child could be harmed, at least that is known) he had not committed a major felony. He was however very recently (last day or so) labelled a dangerous offender. In Canada that means life in prison, no parole, and that life is literal, not the typical life sentence.

The man obviously has some psychopathic tendancies, but the issue for some is that he didn't actually commit the crime he will be serving for, he 'merely' intended to. So there is a bit of backlash going on as to whether the judge was within his right to convict as such.

My personal opinion is that this man would have gone through with it, given the level of planning, and based on his previous attempts. I have no problem with this, although it is a little bit like 'minority report' in a way. Frankly I count it as a blessing that he was caught before he could do the damage, and that he was dumb enough to document thoroughly enough his plans to get convicted as such.

[Explorer]

I was unaware of the "dangerous offender" label in Canada. In doing some reading, I've learned some interesting things.

The "dangerous offender" label is part of Canadian law, and is not just something which a lone judge has imposed capriciously. There are currently 441 persons labeled as such.

From what I've read, the "dangerous offender" label results from someone not only being capable of certain acts, but also from their attempting to actively follow through. In this case, the perpetrator had attempted to kidnap a child from her home, and had revealed as well his intention to repeatedly rape and torture that child. There was also the revealed intention to improve up on the plan, including getting the mother of the child to unknowingly ingest sleeping pills.


----

I imagine that if anyone in Canada is serious about the notion of this person not being guilty of the attempt, they can probably work actively to change the law. I'm not sure if they'll get past the laughter when they argue that this person wasn't really attempting to kidnap the girl, and that all those kidnap items he was carrying were just odd and ends.

----


Although you are technically correct about being unable to parole out of being labeled a "dangerous offender," you are incorrect about being imprisoned thereby without option of release. Canada has 18 "dangerous offenders" out of prison, living in communities under supervision.

This is similar to be labeled a "sex offender" in the United States, in that the right to live freely is forfeit at the point where one commits certain crimes. One must thereafter follow the rules to remain free, due to one having proven one's inescapable tendencies. In both cases (Canada & US), it isn't a thought crime which causes someone to be labeled an "offender"; it is actually attempting to carry something through which brings that consequence upon the person who attempts to, or succeeds in, doing terrible things to another person.

I imagine that last point, that one can eventually gain one's liberty if one sincerely attempts to overcome the thing that makes one a danger to other members of the community, which will deflate any headway in attempting to overturn the law.

[SirMyghin]

Shows how good doing actually research is there Explorer, I was unaware and have never heard of that in regards to a dangerous offender. I guess it is just the entirety of their sentence then, if some are out. I have never looked into it deeply, just what I was told overall.

[matt397]

I feel like a broken record but this is another scenario that 1) I long for the death penalty to come back to canada and 2) yet again instills feelings of misanthropy, people like this disgust me. whats worse is even if he serves lets say 25 years of a life sentence, at the cost of $80,000 a year in a maximum security penetentiary he is going to cost the citizens of this country $2000000

[Origin]

I think based on the overWHELMING evidence it was right to do what was done to him, and though I could never, ever support the state being allowed to decide whether someone lives or dies, in any country, ever, if he had gone through with it before being caught I would have been relieved to hear of his death in some way.

[chevymeister]

Makes me wonder if anyone can just get pegged a dangerous offender in the future for shit they didn't plan to commit. Lol.

[matt397]

Originally Posted by chevymeister

Makes me wonder if anyone can just get pegged a dangerous offender in the future for shit they didn't plan to commit. Lol.

....why ?

[SirMyghin]

Originally Posted by chevymeister

Makes me wonder if anyone can just get pegged a dangerous offender in the future for shit they didn't plan to commit. Lol.

Are you implying that this guy didn't plan to follow through, there is a whole tonne of evidence to the contrary.

[synrgy]

Good on them. Maybe we can take a nod and treat some of our media mouthpieces who spew inflammatory bull shit every day in a similar fashion.

In seriousness, I see no issue here. People here serve time for 'attempted' crimes regularly. I would say the point of contention as to where the official lines between 'intent' 'attempt' and 'realized' is rather moot, especially in this specific case. To argue otherwise implies that 'we' should have 'let' him carry to completion his intended plans before taking him into custody, and that's not a pretty picture at all.

I mean, down here people can get in some rather serious shit for even joking about having malicious intentions. Malice is serious business, and I mean that truly; not in the sarcastic internet context.

[highlordmugfug]

If you don't get out of the bank with any money in your duffel bag, you're still arrested.

[chronocide]

Yeah, if the crime was attempted, it seems reasonable enough that he loses his freedom. Though on the details in the first post alone, it strikes me that a sentence in secure metal institution would be more appropriate. I think the "Minority report" kind of thing would start to be a concern if he'd planned the crime but never actually attempted to go through with it at any point, however doubtful, you do need to give people the benefit of the doubt that they might eventually think "Hang on, I can't do this, this is horrific".

The mention of the death penalty isn't even worth commenting on.

[Grand Moff Tim]

Originally Posted by chronocide

Though on the details in the first post alone, it strikes me that a sentence in secure metal institution would be more appropriate.

Typo of the month so far. Don't you dare fix it.

[jeremyb]

Bullet in the head would be cheaper, dunno why we allow people like this to remain in society, even prison society.

[chronocide]

Originally Posted by Grand Moff Tim

Typo of the month so far. Don't you dare fix it.

Amazing.

[SirMyghin]

Originally Posted by chronocide

Yeah, if the crime was attempted, it seems reasonable enough that he loses his freedom. Though on the details in the first post alone, it strikes me that a sentence in secure metal institution would be more appropriate. I think the "Minority report" kind of thing would start to be a concern if he'd planned the crime but never actually attempted to go through with it at any point, however doubtful, you do need to give people the benefit of the doubt that they might eventually think "Hang on, I can't do this, this is horrific".

The mention of the death penalty isn't even worth commenting on.

Even the most secure mental institutions still have many more chances to escape than a good prison. That is likely the reasoning there.

[The Reverend]

I support this. I'm glad no one has decided to abuse the slippery-slope argument, as well.

[highlordmugfug]

Originally Posted by The Reverend

I support this. I'm glad no one has decided to abuse the slippery-slope argument, as well.

Originally Posted by chevymeister

Makes me wonder if anyone can just get pegged a dangerous offender in the future for shit they didn't plan to commit. Lol.

But... but he did.

[Phlegethon]

thinking on a larger scale, I don't think this will set any precedence for convicting people who might do a crime because the criminal in question had planned this out to such a degree (along with the police finding the plans) AND being caught hiding in the bushes with some rather incriminating items didn't help him a whole lot

for this case, like every other person in this thread I agree with the dangerous offender label despite not being convicted due to the overwhelming amount of premeditation, and catching him in the bushes waiting for his victim

now if this starts to go the "minority report" way then there's a problem as you're arresting people for far more arbitrary and subjective things which wouldn't be an actual threat. if I were arrested for planning to make chibanez/chibson guitars based on the fact that I've checked out a couple of their websites to see the quality of the fakes to compare them to originals this wouldn't be acceptable though .. so as long as it doesn't cross a line into absurdity/big brother style rulings we're safe

[ZEBOV]

Originally Posted by jeremyb

Bullet in the head would be cheaper, dunno why we allow people like this to remain in society, even prison society.

If someone one death row attempts suicide, prison officials will try to save their life.

[chronocide]

Originally Posted by SirMyghin

Even the most secure mental institutions still have many more chances to escape than a good prison. That is likely the reasoning there.

Ah, perhaps. That's not the case here so it didn't really occur to me as likely reasoning.

[SirMyghin]

Originally Posted by chronocide

Ah, perhaps. That's not the case here so it didn't really occur to me as likely reasoning.

We don't know how to build a good looney bin here

[Grand Moff Tim]

[estabon37]

Originally Posted by jeremyb

Bullet in the head would be cheaper, dunno why we allow people like this to remain in society, even prison society.

Wish I could find a source, but I've read/heard that because of the appeals process, sentencing an inmate to death can be more expensive than life in prison. From the lowest to highest courts, state and federal, a convictee can appeal several times. They are imprisoned at taxpayer expense during those appeals. The taxpayers have to pay for a lawyer if the offender can't afford one. The taxpayers have to pay for a judge and in many cases a jury for every appeal. Each time it can cost more than a couple of years worth of imprisonment for a single case.

I'll try to come back with a source. Basically, I always used to make the 'cheap bullet' argument but I'm not so sure anymore.

[estabon37]

Does the death penalty cost less than life in prison without parole? - Death Penalty - ProCon.org

The Office of Legislative Research for the Connecticut General Assembly, in its Apr. 13, 2000 study titled "Comparison of Capital Punishment Costs in Texas and Connecticut," concluded:
"There are several problems involved in trying to determine the cost of a capital case. First, there is a wide variety of costs associated with capital cases. These include costs for prosecuting and defense attorneys, interpreters, expert witnesses, court reporters, psychiatrists, secretaries, and jury consultants.
Another problem is the length and complexity of the process. Cases tend to last several years and can pass through three possible phases. The first phase includes state trial court (two trials - one to determine guilt, the other for sentence), state Supreme Court, and possible appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. The second phase is the state habeas corpus (post-conviction process) and appeals. The final phase is federal habeas corpus, which includes appeals to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and to the U.S. Supreme Court...
A third problem is the way states budget money for entities that are involved with capital cases. For example, Texas and Connecticut allocate specific sums to their judicial departments. It is difficult to separate the costs each department incurs for capital cases from those for other cases. From a data-gathering standpoint, Texas presents yet another problem. Each county (there are 254) must bear the costs of its capital cases. It is extremely difficult to get data from the counties. Dallas is the only county from which we received partial data, and we were unable to determine whether they are representative of other counties."

Crawford's Take: Death Penalty Myth #1: It's Cheaper than Life in Prison

The bottom line is that the costs of things like expert witness fees, and research are extremely expensive in a death penalty case at the trial phase. If the state is going to get a jury of people to kill someone, the attorneys often will go way overboard in trying the case (this seems like it's good, but take a look at what an over-zealous prosecutor is capable of when trying to prove a death penalty case. The appeals process is often not the culprit in raising the costs of death penalty cases. Consider that even with life without parole, some prisoners will appeal and so that portion of the costs is a wash. Let me repeat... The higher cost is IN THE INITIAL TRIAL.

Consider these facts and then ask me some questions!




FINANCIAL FACTS ABOUT THE DEATH PENALTY

• The California death penalty system costs taxpayers $114 million per year beyond the costs of keeping convicts locked up for life. Taxpayers have paid more than $250 million for each of the state’s executions. (L.A. Times, March 6, 2005)
• In Kansas, the costs of capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-capital cases, including the costs of incarceration. (Kansas Performance Audit Report, December 2003).
• In Indiana, the total costs of the death penalty exceed the complete costs of life without parole sentences by about 38%, assuming that 20% of death sentences are overturned and reduced to life. (Indiana Criminal Law Study Commission, January 10, 2002).
• The most comprehensive study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million per execution over the costs of sentencing murderers to life imprisonment. The majority of those costs occur at the trial level. (Duke University, May 1993).
• Enforcing the death penalty costs Florida $51 million a year above what it would cost to punish all first-degree murderers with life in prison without parole. Based on the 44 executions Florida had carried out since 1976, that amounts to a cost of $24 million for each execution. (Palm Beach Post, January 4, 2000).
• In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. (Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992). www.deathpenaltyinfo.org

Basic google search. Probably better sources around, I just don't have time to find them right now.

[Explorer]

Not a lot of focus has been placed on a parallel idea: How much does it cost when a prisoner, not sentenced to death, files appeal after appeal in order to regain freedom?

Does someone sentenced to prison without possibility of parole automatically refuse to pursue freedom?

I've never bought into looking at certain societal features in terms of pure economics. Sure, it might be cheaper to let someone die in the doorway to the emergency room rather than have them run up unpaid debt. Society as a whole, however, does provide to keep its members in good shape. That's why fire engines will go to the shittiest parts of town, even if those buildings aren't worth as much as someone's McMansion.

Is deciding that providing police investigation work for the rape of a poor woman a matter of finances, or of keeping society safe as a whole?

How much does it cost to arrest serial killers of poor black children? Isn't it cheaper to just let it ride?

Yes, some things are cheaper than others, but that doesn't necessarily make them better.