Options
Canadian Justice System
Jukee
Posts: 4,500
It's Monday morning and I feel as though I need to vent...
A year ago a 25 year old male drove while intoxicated and hit and killed three teenagers. He didn't stop and later drove into a house. He is out on bail.
Two or three months ago a 22 year old male kills his 2 month old son. He is out on bail.
A month ago another 20 something male fired 5 shots striking another male. He is being charged with 5 counts of attempted murder. He is out on bail.
Two and a half years ago my best friend was murdered and stabbed 80 times by her 14 year old step-son. He recieved 4 years in a youth facility and 3 years under community supervision. His name will be cleared since he is under 18 years old.
All these indicents happened where I live. Something definately needs to change.
A year ago a 25 year old male drove while intoxicated and hit and killed three teenagers. He didn't stop and later drove into a house. He is out on bail.
Two or three months ago a 22 year old male kills his 2 month old son. He is out on bail.
A month ago another 20 something male fired 5 shots striking another male. He is being charged with 5 counts of attempted murder. He is out on bail.
Two and a half years ago my best friend was murdered and stabbed 80 times by her 14 year old step-son. He recieved 4 years in a youth facility and 3 years under community supervision. His name will be cleared since he is under 18 years old.
All these indicents happened where I live. Something definately needs to change.
If you have nothing to lose, you have nothing to worry about.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Take it easy, man. The US justice system is just as bad. Criminals and terrorists are the "victims", and decent people keep getting the shaft.
although what you posted those times seem even more short.
so sorry about your friend... that truly is terrible.
our justice system should change the minors thing to 16 at least, i think you should be accountable at the age of 14 or 15... especially for a crime as heavy as murder.
think you are confusing bail and parole
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/One-year-sentence-angers-mom-263934541.html
Emily Cablek couldn’t bear to watch the sentencing hearing of the man who helped facilitate the kidnapping of her two children.
And the Winnipeg mother is having a tough time digesting the one-year jail term handed down this week, calling it a serious injustice.
Enlarge Image
Robert Groen (POLICE / HANDOUT)
Enlarge Image
Kevin Maryk (WINNIPEG FREE PRESS FILES) Photo Store
"It’s sad. He pretty much got away with it," Cablek told the Free Press Thursday.
"I lost my kids for four years, which is a lot worse. I feel like he’s not really taking any responsibility."
Robert Groen, 43, pleaded guilty to being a party to abduction for his role in the kidnappings. The Crown sought a four-year prison term.
Dominic Maryk, now 13, and Abby Maryk, now 11, were abducted while on a court-authorized visitation with their father, Kevin Maryk, in August 2008.
They were found in May 2012 in Mexico.
“‘It’s sad. He pretty much got away with it. I lost my kids for four years, which is a lot worse. I feel like he’s not really taking any responsibility’ — Emily CablekKevin Maryk is set to be sentenced later this month. A third accused, Maryk’s nephew, Cody McKay, 24, is wanted on a warrant. McKay is believed to be hiding in Mexico.
Cablek didn’t attend Groen’s hearing, instead allowing justice officials to play a videotaped victim-impact statement that spoke of the trauma inflicted on her two children.
Both were kept as "virtual prisoners," provincial court Judge Dale Schille said upon hearing the facts.
But that leaves Cablek wondering why he didn’t deliver a tougher sentence.
Schille sentenced Groen to six more months in jail. He’s already served six months. He will likely be released on parole by this summer.
"(Groen) has a child himself (a 15-year-old daughter). How he could just sit back and let this happen is frustrating," Cablek said Thursday.
Cablek hopes the Crown is considering an appeal of the ruling. It has 30 days to file an appeal.
Groen, a longtime neighbour and friend of Maryk, admitted to sending more than US$30,000 to Mexico. That money allowed Maryk to continue hiding out with the two children. They were living in virtual squalor, with no access to doctors, dentists or schools. The children have behavioural and developmental issues because they were isolated from others for so long.
"Dominic and Abby had their safety put on the line constantly. It wasn’t any kind of normal life," Cablek said.
When Winnipeg police began to close in on Groen in 2011, he fled to Mexico to live with Maryk and the children.
Groen left his wife, emptied their bank account and sold much of his possessions, including $30,000 in jewelry, the car he was driving that was owned by his parents and a $4,000 stamp collection.
At his sentencing, Groen’s lawyer claimed Maryk had "control" over him based on his aggressive demeanour. But Cablek questioned how he could have stayed silent for so many years, especially when Maryk was in Mexico and he remained in Winnipeg.
"When Kevin left, why couldn’t he have gone to the police?" she said Thursday. "And it’s not like he forced him to (go) to Mexico."
Cablek is planning to attend Maryk’s sentencing hearing in person. She believes the Crown plans to seek a five-year sentence. The maximum penalty for abduction is 10 years.
Both children are confused about their father, who is now gone from their lives.
"They both miss their dad, of course. They don’t know why he did what he did," Cablek said.
Abby is struggling the most.
"She puts it behind her rather than deal with it. It’s like that time of her life doesn’t exist. She doesn’t like to talk about anything," said Cablek.
Dominic suffers extreme emotional issues and spends much of his time playing video games.
"He still has nightmares, is afraid of the dark," said Cablek.
She and her kids have spent countless hours with psychologists and counsellors, but progress is slow. "Things aren’t the way I’d hoped they’d be," said Cablek.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
While you were away, the Canadian justice system was brought up in another thread (I didn't realize this thread existed). I think it was in the drunk driving thread.
These types of stories are ridiculously commonplace up here in the great white north. I become exasperated when reading the news and looking at how weak our penal system is.
It's a flat out joke. For a 'classic'... read the following if you dare:
In 2001, Dean Robert Zimmerman was sentenced to jail for brutally raping, tormenting, and torturing his pregnant wife in an attack that lasted over 48 hours. He not only repeatedly assaulted her, but he also broke her nose and threatened to cut her unborn baby from her belly. And this attack took place while he was out on parole for the earlier violent rape of a 19-year-old woman.
Then, after serving less than four years in jail for that horrific attack, the guy was released and, on January 1, 2005, he committed yet another vicious attack, this time a nine-hour sex assault/torture session involving a toilet plunger and a 24-year-old Edmonton woman.
He pleaded guilty to sexual assault involving a weapon and forcible confinement and was sent away for—wait for it—40 whole months in federal prison.
Yes, that's right, forty months. That's three years and four months in prison for a savage sexual and physical assault and sadistic torture session. His third such conviction in a few short years to boot.
When exactly, one wonders, will the courts start considering this guy a threat to society and someone, perhaps, deserving of a real substantial prison sentence?
It's not just the courts though. The whole system is a joke. He was actually sentenced to six years—a rather insignificant sentence considering his crimes—but on September 29, 2009 he was released nearly three years early.
"But maybe he was reformed and repentant", you say.
Well, actually the National Parole Board describes him as a psychopath who is lacking remorse and empathy and whose violence towards women is escalating to a deadly level. Just last year they wrote that if released "There is a likelihood [he] would commit an offence causing serious harm or death".
And so they released him. And now he's skipped out on parole and is on the run.
http://www.straight.com/blogra/canadian-justice-system-so-broken-its-criminal
Okay okay... don't worry. That piece was written in 2009 so it's not likely he's out now. They've probably apprehended him and I'm sure things are just fine.
Oh oh. Wait a second. Nope. Worry. He's served another 34 months and he's raring to go:
http://globalnews.ca/news/492731/rcmp-warn-of-violent-sex-offenders-release-in-red-deer/
(April, 2013)
False alarm. It's fine. We don't have to worry. Pshew! He's been apprehended again so there will be a reprieve for a couple of months:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/red-deer-high-risk-sex-offender-arrested-1.2447205
(December, 2013)
Absolute, 100%, irrefutable, sheer absurdity.
Did you read the post I placed in this thread? Even though a guy can rot behind bars for life after the first violent rape he commits (in my mind)... we insist on providing mutants such as this multiple opportunities to display he can refrain from kidnapping, torturing and raping women they encounter before we even consider a harsh sentence. By 'harsh sentence'... I guess I mean something more than 20 months because there is a bleeding heart contingent amongst our policy makers that have been calling the shots and they don't think much of multiple violent rape convictions- they're focused on the poor, poor rapist and how he just needs another chance... even though he refuses therapy, displays a clear and consistent pattern of deviant behaviour, and has been labelled a 'psychopath' by our experts.
It's a fucking joke. Just agree here, please.
So what's the solution? How do we build a better mouse trap? Think judges should be able to make case by case decisions. But sometimes they get it wrong.
And yes till someone comes up with better solution this is the best we have and mostly it works ok.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/sx-ffndr-rcdvsm/index-eng.aspx
https://www.ncjrs.gov/sexoffenders/treatment.html
Locking people up and throwing away the key is not the answer.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
If some guy rapes a child, his rehabilitation is hardly something I'm going to concern myself with. It's one thing that we don't place him in the ring with the father of the child... it's quite another to become so concerned with providing him opportunities to rape more children.
If some mutant rapes a kid... lets error on the side of caution and, yes, throw away the key. Unless, of course, you would like to offer your home with your children in it as a 'halfway place' for him to try and reintegrate.
I agree that our system isn't perfect, but I prefer rehabilitation to punishment. Mandatory minimums are draconian and a Harper pushed agenda that have no base in science and fact. They make us feel better and safer but are shown to not be good for society as a whole. To house all these perps in jail would cost money, money that could be used in programs for me and you. Money that could be used to rehabilitate them. It just makes economical sense.
I'm not naive, I know some people just cant be fixed. But it is proven that most can, given the right help.
You may be interested in this, I found it very eye opening.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/522/tarred-and-feathered?act=2#play
If you have seen any of the other threads, I am always arguing for the side of rehabilitation as well. But I was honestly under the impression that violent sex offenders (especially pedophiles) are less likely to be rehabilitated than any other criminal. Not sure where I got that from (maybe watching too much SVU-who knows). I shall read up on it sir. Thanks for the link.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
As it stands right now... The reconviction rate for all the releases in the first year was 44%.
http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/rcvd-fdffndr/index-eng.aspx
I looked through various sources, but found it hard to find a document that listed recidivism rates by criminal nature. Assuming the rates stay somewhat consistent between criminal activities, with burglars and car thieves, the reconviction rate is nothing we should be too concerned about and one could even argue that we have been successful changing these types of behaviours; however, when we 'roll the dice' with sexual offenders and release them into the public in the hopes that they assume a 'normal' life... and they don't... the consequences are profound- we can always replace a car. It's a lot harder to repair the damages a child suffers as a result of a rape.
Prentky, Lee, Knight, and Cerce (1997) found that over a 25-year period, child molesters had higher rates of reoffense than rapists. In this study, recidivism was operationalized as a failure rate and calculated as the proportion of individuals who were rearrested using survival analysis (which takes into account the amount of time each offender has been at risk in the community). Results show that over longer periods of time, child molesters have a higher failure rate—thus, a higher rate of rearrest—than rapists (52 percent versus 39 percent over 25 years).
http://www.csom.org/pubs/recidsexof.html
Labelling someone as a dangerous offender is in the interest of public safety. I'm sorry, but if a pedophile rapist moves into my neighbourhood and has, statistically speaking, a 50% chance of reoffending... then I want to know about this.
I do have sympathy for them. (the ones who don't act on there urges) It would be a shitty way to live.
Edit: sorry I see you did post some of that article. I didn't catch that.
Discussion
Most sexual offenders do not re-offend sexually over time. This may be the most important finding of this study as this finding is contrary to some strongly held beliefs. After 15 years, 73% of sexual offenders had not been charged with, or convicted of, another sexual offence. The sample was sufficiently large that very strong contradictory evidence is necessary to substantially change these recidivism estimates. Other studies have found similar results. Hanson and Bussière's (1998) quantitative review of recidivism studies found an average recidivism rate of 13.4% after a follow-up period of 4-5 years (n = 23,393). In a recent U.S. study of 9,691 sex offenders, the sexual recidivism rate was only 5.3% after three years (Langan, Schmitt, & Durose, 2003).
Not all sexual offenders, however, were equally likely to reoffend. By using simple, easily observed characteristics, it was possible to differentiate between offenders whose five year recidivism rate was 5%, from those whose recidivism rate was 25%. The factors associated with increased risk were the following: a) male victims, b) prior sexual offences, and c) young age.
Although the number of recidivists increases with extended follow-up, the rate of offending decreases the longer offenders have been offence-free. The five year recidivism rate for new releases of 14% decreased to 4% for individuals who have been offence-free for 15 years. The observed rates underestimate the actual rates because not all sexual offences are detected; nevertheless, the current findings contrast with the popular notion that all sexual offender remain at risk throughout their lifespan.
The observed recidivism rates in the current study are slightly lower than the lifetime sexual recidivism rates estimated by Doren (1998) - 52% for child molesters and 39% for rapists. Doren's estimates were largely based on long-term follow-up of highly selected samples (Hanson et al., 1995; Prentky, et al., 1997); in contrast, the current study used larger and more diverse samples, including many low risk offenders serving community sentences. Doren's (1998) estimates were also based on charges, whereas most of the recidivism data in the current study was based on convictions.
Another difference is that Doren (1998) attempted to generate life-time estimates whereas our estimates extend only to 15 years. We were unable to locate any study that followed a large sample of sexual offenders until they were dead. Very long-term studies are difficult because records go missing, particularly for individuals who have had no recent involvement with the law (Hanson & Nicholaichuk, 2000). Nevertheless, the decreasing rate of offending with age suggests that the rates observed after 15 to 20 years are likely to approximate the rates that would be observed if offenders were followed for the rest of their lives.
When people ask questions about sexual offender recidivism rates, there often is an inherent assumption that the answer is a fixed, knowable rate that will not change. This supposition is unlikely to be true. The rate of sexual re-offence is quite likely to change over time due to social factors and the effectiveness of strategies for managing this population. Most of the offenders in the current study did not receive effective treatment, whereas treatment is currently provided to almost all of the high risk sexual offenders in Canada. Research has found that contemporary cognitive-behavioural treatment is associated with reductions in sexual recidivism rates from 17% to 10% after approximately 5 years of follow-up (Hanson et al., 2002). Furthermore, increased public awareness and concern should reduce the opportunities for sexual offenders to locate potential victims.
Policy implications
Although no finding is ever definitive, the basic findings of the current study are sufficiently reliable to have implications for criminal justice policy. Given that the level of sexual recidivism is lower than commonly believed, discussions of the risk posed by sexual offenders should clearly differentiate between the high public concern about these offences and the relatively low probability of sexual re-offence.
The variation in recidivism rates suggests that not all sex offenders should be treated the same. Within the correctional literature it is well known that the most effective use of correctional resources targets truly high-risk offenders and applies lower levels of resources to lower risk offenders (Andrews & Bonta, 2003). The greater the assessed risk, the higher the levels of intervention and supervision; the lower the assessed risk, the lower the levels of intervention and supervision. Research has even suggested that offenders may actually be made worse by the imposition of higher levels of treatment and supervision than is warranted given their risk level (Andrews & Bonta, 2003). Consequently, blanket policies that treat all sexual offenders as "high risk" waste resources by over-supervising lower risk offenders and risk diverting resources from the truly high-risk offenders who could benefit from increased supervision and human service.
Although the broad risk markers in the current study are useful for estimating recidivism risk, it is possible to improve predictive accuracy by combining such factors into structured risk scales (e.g., Hanson, 1997). The evidence supporting the validity of these risk scales is now sufficient that they should be routinely included in applied risk assessments with sexual offenders (Barbaree, Seto, Langton, Peacock, 2001; Sjöstedt, & Långström, 2001; and reviews by Doren, 2002; Hanson, Morton & Harris, 2003).
Rather than considering all sexual offenders as continuous, lifelong threats, society will be better served when legislation and policies consider the cost/benefit break point after which resources spent tracking and supervising low-risk sexual offenders are better re-directed toward the management of high-risk sexual offenders, crime prevention, and victim services.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014