Well written danmand. In fact I was so impressed that I did a thread search and would be curious about what is your motivation or interest on being on an escort review site seeing I can't find a thread that relates to a position or experience as to what would interest you in such a board. Did you write a letter to the editor of the newspaper or are writing out articles about this? You should do that to get your voice out there.
Gerald Stanley found not guilty in death of Colten Boushie
- Thread starter Charlemagne
- Start date
Stanley clearly made up his story. The jury didn't care. They wanted to acquit him anyway because they felt sorry for him and felt that they would have been as scared and as desperate in the same circumstances and done exactly what Stanley did.
And then made up the same lie.
BTW, here's s. 35 of the Criminal Code. It's more applicable than s. 27, which I posted yesterday.
Defence of Property
Marginal note : Defence — property
35 (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if
(a) they either believe on reasonable grounds that they are in peaceable possession of property or are acting under the authority of, or lawfully assisting, a person whom they believe on reasonable grounds is in peaceable possession of property;
(b) they believe on reasonable grounds that another person
(i) is about to enter, is entering or has entered the property without being entitled by law to do so,
(ii) is about to take the property, is doing so or has just done so, or
(iii) is about to damage or destroy the property, or make it inoperative, or is doing so;
(c) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of
(i) preventing the other person from entering the property, or removing that person from the property, or
(ii) preventing the other person from taking, damaging or destroying the property or from making it inoperative, or retaking the property from that person; and
(d) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances.
Marginal note:No defence
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person who believes on reasonable grounds that they are, or who is believed on reasonable grounds to be, in peaceable possession of the property does not have a claim of right to it and the other person is entitled to its possession by law.
Marginal note:No defence
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply if the other person is doing something that they are required or authorized by law to do in the administration or enforcement of the law, unless the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence believes on reasonable grounds that the other person is acting unlawfully.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 35; 2012, c. 9, s. 2.
Boushie and his buddies were clearly trespassing and clearly intended to steal or damage property. So the only issue is whether Stanley used proportionate and reasonable force in shooting and killing Boushie.
He probably did. Boushie and his friends were armed. They were several. They were persistent and aggressive. And they had ignored 2 warning shots. So I am calling what Stanley did legal under s. 35 of the Code.
If Stanley had known enough law to simply tell his own story and rely on s. 35 and s. 27, he would have been acquitted anyway. Instead he made up an implausible story and the jury walked him - essentially because they thought what Stanley did was reasonable.
And then made up the same lie.
BTW, here's s. 35 of the Criminal Code. It's more applicable than s. 27, which I posted yesterday.
Defence of Property
Marginal note : Defence — property
35 (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if
(a) they either believe on reasonable grounds that they are in peaceable possession of property or are acting under the authority of, or lawfully assisting, a person whom they believe on reasonable grounds is in peaceable possession of property;
(b) they believe on reasonable grounds that another person
(i) is about to enter, is entering or has entered the property without being entitled by law to do so,
(ii) is about to take the property, is doing so or has just done so, or
(iii) is about to damage or destroy the property, or make it inoperative, or is doing so;
(c) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of
(i) preventing the other person from entering the property, or removing that person from the property, or
(ii) preventing the other person from taking, damaging or destroying the property or from making it inoperative, or retaking the property from that person; and
(d) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances.
Marginal note:No defence
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person who believes on reasonable grounds that they are, or who is believed on reasonable grounds to be, in peaceable possession of the property does not have a claim of right to it and the other person is entitled to its possession by law.
Marginal note:No defence
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply if the other person is doing something that they are required or authorized by law to do in the administration or enforcement of the law, unless the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence believes on reasonable grounds that the other person is acting unlawfully.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 35; 2012, c. 9, s. 2.
Boushie and his buddies were clearly trespassing and clearly intended to steal or damage property. So the only issue is whether Stanley used proportionate and reasonable force in shooting and killing Boushie.
He probably did. Boushie and his friends were armed. They were several. They were persistent and aggressive. And they had ignored 2 warning shots. So I am calling what Stanley did legal under s. 35 of the Code.
If Stanley had known enough law to simply tell his own story and rely on s. 35 and s. 27, he would have been acquitted anyway. Instead he made up an implausible story and the jury walked him - essentially because they thought what Stanley did was reasonable.
An anonymous post on Reddit, claiming to quote a lawyer, and you believe it? Reads like BS.
Stanley took the stand and testified. Think it is believable that he was holding the gun, and in that panic/chaotic situation while reaching into the truck, the gun went off. Stanley does not know why the gun went off, just that it was not intentional. It could have been a hang fire, but unlikely. Could have been the trigger snagged on something, or he squeezed or bumped the trigger while reaching into the truck. It happens at the best of times, mostly without such tragic results.
Unless he shot the robbers in the back as they ran away, think any jury would have a hard time sending someone to jail who was basically protecting his family and property from armed robbers.
Give your head a shake. Rob Feist is a real Lawyer, not a pretend lawyer like the ones here on Terb.
When you get your RPAL you are basically told that it is a criminal offense to discharge your firearm except at a certified gun range, and at all other times your firearm must be in a safe or in a locked case with a trigger lock. And that if you shot someone and your in big trouble, whether or not your life or your family is in danger The government and the police do not want you to protect yourself or to own firearms period.
Should he have been charged with the careless discharge and storage of a firearm, probably. Will that be the next step in the story, probably.
Did the kid deserve to die, no. Was it an accident, I believe so, I don't think the intent was to kill, but to run some thieves off and to send a message to their pals.
Was Colten a "victim"? Only of being stupid, he may not have been aware of any of the activates leading up to his death, if as some comments say he was sleeping it off, he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
What about the 2 assholes who ran away, who was behind the wheel and decided to try and rob this man's property? They we're driving around with a loaded rifle for fun, which is illegal whether or not your First Nations.
I'd put the blame of this on both the farmer and the First Nations community for being too busy to set an example of how young people should behave. Others have commented here on how the current mood in First Nations communities is that any thefts are justified because the "Settlers" stole from us. I think some people need to give their heads a shake and make sure that their young people grow up strong, proud members of the CANADIAN community. My parents made dam sure I respected others and treated everyone fairly.
Should he have been charged with the careless discharge and storage of a firearm, probably. Will that be the next step in the story, probably.
Did the kid deserve to die, no. Was it an accident, I believe so, I don't think the intent was to kill, but to run some thieves off and to send a message to their pals.
Was Colten a "victim"? Only of being stupid, he may not have been aware of any of the activates leading up to his death, if as some comments say he was sleeping it off, he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
What about the 2 assholes who ran away, who was behind the wheel and decided to try and rob this man's property? They we're driving around with a loaded rifle for fun, which is illegal whether or not your First Nations.
I'd put the blame of this on both the farmer and the First Nations community for being too busy to set an example of how young people should behave. Others have commented here on how the current mood in First Nations communities is that any thefts are justified because the "Settlers" stole from us. I think some people need to give their heads a shake and make sure that their young people grow up strong, proud members of the CANADIAN community. My parents made dam sure I respected others and treated everyone fairly.
On a side note, I'm going to give $100 to "https://www.gofundme.com/gerald-stanley-support-fund" to help with his legal bills. If you are aware of the rash of thefts, assaults and murders being committed of Farmers in rural areas where the police are hours away, you'd understand why Mr. Stanley acted to protect his family. I don't agree with his actions, but I wasn't there and I don't know his frame of mind.
He now claims that he taught pre law as well.
http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/bonokoski-evolving-resume-of-pm-justin-trudeau
I'd like to think that our First Nations people will come into into the fold like all other Canadians. The current and growing batch of young Canadians will care less and less as time passes since our ancestors 'stole' North America. They might not even have an ancestor involved...
Is it sad or promising that our East Indian buddies have it better off than our North American "Indians" in today's Canada? They participate and become involved in Canada.
The World passes us all by. The future is what it is, our future...
Is it sad or promising that our East Indian buddies have it better off than our North American "Indians" in today's Canada? They participate and become involved in Canada.
The World passes us all by. The future is what it is, our future...
Last edited:
Not going to happen anytime soon. The major movement in indigenous communities these days is decolonization. There are different interpretations of what exactly decolonization means but it mostly involves them moving away from "the fold".
https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/a-brief-definition-of-decolonization-and-indigenization
Decolonization is about shifting the way Indigenous Peoples view themselves and the way non-Indigenous people view Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous Peoples are reclaiming the family, community, culture, language, history and traditions that were taken from them under the federal government policies designed for assimilation. Some communities are reclaiming control via self-government agreements, treaties, or other negotiated agreements. It’s about revealing, renewal and rediscovery.
If that is the case, then we should leave them be... Free of all funding and assistance. They were “conquered” like many cultures before them and will be afterwards. I wasn’t part of that any more so than the Romans spreading all throughout Europe (they made great changes to the Calendar).
It would be ideal for their people to join in with the multicultural Canada and teach others. Help the people that want to be part of Canada.
It would be ideal for their people to join in with the multicultural Canada and teach others. Help the people that want to be part of Canada.
Reasonable force? I guy was shot in the head from a very short distance away. If someone points a gun at you and you fire back, okay. This comes across as an execution. What's worse is Boushie wasn't in the driver's seat nor was he holding a gun. So it comes down to accidental fire or execution, not reasonable force in defense of one's self.
There is reasonable doubt about intent to kill i.e. 2nd degree murder. But manslaughter which is when you kill someone via your actions? Stanley's actions resulted in death.
Except he had no idea there was a gun in the mix until after.
Some good points. Definitely nobody deserved to die which is what makes this a senseless tragedy. But I would like people to come forward and admit that part of the blame lies with the number of bad apples in the first Nation community whose actions probably resulted in this situation boiling over. I personally think that some members of that community give it a bad reputation. For instance, I don't think anyone would disagree that what added to this situation was (1) the alleged frequency of robberies of farmers by indigenous people (2) the individuals in this case attempting to steal and (3) alcohol. If this case was simply a matter of some well-behaved youth going for help and ending up shot dead, yes you could claim this was racism gone bad. But these "friends" acted stupidly and their friend was shot as a result. Again, nobody deserved to die but I don't think anyone would have batted an eye if Boushie was simply injured by a shot instead of killed. This thing stinks because it looks more like execution and less like an accident but what led up to this should be taken into consideration.
EI's? What do they have to do with this story, other than the same "name?"
My general question will be if people learn from this tragedy? Will there be better law enforcement? Will First Nations youth act better? On some level this sends a message that protecting oneself is okay so I'd think twice before attempting similar types of actions.
The witnesses for the Crown were unreliable, and the physical evidence says Boushie was in the drivers seat.
Gerald Stanley must be held accountable for death of Colten Boushie, Crown argues
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...ting-in-gerald-stanley-trial/article37900404/
Ms. Jackson testified she heard two shots into the car, when there appears to have been one, and that Mr. Boushie was seated in the passenger seat, when blood spatter shows he was in the driver's seat.
When it comes down to the verdict, would expect the jury would consider the group was out to rob people, were drinking, and that they had a rifle in the front seat. Stanley was too honest to say he did not see the rifle till after. If Stanley had said he saw Boushie reaching for the rifle, would Stanley have been charged at all?
There was no excuse to kill Native people...Stanley didn't get up early that day thinking "i got to kill me some natives today"...he was put in that situation by Boushie and friends...
What is "reasonable force" when you are besieged by 3 or 4 aggressive, drunk rowdies who invade your farm, harass your wife and ignore two warning shots??!! And Stanley has to react quickly when the poor fucker is probably scared to death and angry and humiliated at the same time. The jury gave him the benefit of the doubt and I think we should as well.
And how is any of this "racism"?
