Ontario Appeal Court rules mandatory minimum sentences unconstitutional

[Julian]

So the Ontario Appeal Court rules mandatory minimums regarding gun offenses are unconstitutional. What does this mean for the giant crime omnibus bill that the cons snuck into the fold recently? Was it just for show to get votes? Are the mandatory minimums of the omnibus crime bill considered unconstitutional as well in light of this ruling?

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/ontarios-top-court-issue-landmark-ruling-mandatory-minimum-090008489.html

 

[fmahovalich]

What it shows is the Courts think they run the Country.

Its a sad day in times like this that our voted parliamentarians cannot make laws, and the courts enforce them.

you can't blame them for trying. Sadly, the gangsters will be out earlier.

 

[Keebler Elf]

Mandatory minimums are reactionary and for lazy politicians looking to score some quick votes.

A JUDGE should do just that, JUDGE, and determine what the APPROPRIATE penalty is. Not be handcuffed in advance by a bunch of politicians who have never stepped foot inside a court room.

 

[fmahovalich]

Well Keebler, the people of this land wanted and voted in a party who they thought would bring in laws for minimums. The courts have undone that.

Keep in mind, it is the Provincial Court. We will see what the Feds do.

By this logic, we MUST also get rid of maximums then as well.

 

[shrek71]

What it shows is the Courts think they run the Country.

Its a sad day in times like this that our voted parliamentarians cannot make laws, and the courts enforce them.

you can't blame them for trying. Sadly, the gangsters will be out earlier.

The USA has a similar mandatory minimum for their so called war on drugs. The only people that end up with a ridiculous minimum sentence are those people who are unable to roll over and rat out a bigger fish in the drug distribution scheme. So it is the end buyer of the product who ends up getting screwed in this case.

So your comment about gangsters getting out earlier, is spot on. They also may not even go to jail in the first place.

Cheers

 

[nottyboi]

mandatory minimums are stupid. I am glad this nonsense got struck down. Why implement a US style justice system when it is clear that it is a failure.

 

[buttercup]

Well Keebler, the people of this land wanted and voted in a party who they thought would bring in laws for minimums. The courts have undone that.

What if some future wannabe government campaigned on reintroducing slavery? Let's say they proposed to designate as slaves some downtrodden minority group. Let's say the people of this land wanted and voted in a party who they thought would make it possible for us to own those people as slaves, and let's say they did just that.

Wouldn't you want a court system that could undo that new law, and declare it unconstitutional?

 

[fmahovalich]

Oh buttercup....not even worthy of a rebuttal.

Talk about a stupid stance!!!


I just hope a family member of your gets killed one day, or raped, and the perp gets released REAL early.

 

[buttercup]

I just hope a family member of your gets killed one day, or raped.

what!

 

[mandrill]

Well Keebler, the people of this land wanted and voted in a party who they thought would bring in laws for minimums. The courts have undone that.

Keep in mind, it is the Provincial Court. We will see what the Feds do.

By this logic, we MUST also get rid of maximums then as well.

You are such an ignorant buffoon. Google "Ontario Court of Appeal" and "Canada Court System" and then post again and tell us what the Ontario Court of Appeal is and where it ranks in the hierarchy of courts.

And BTW, Keebler has it right.

 

[Julian]

Oh buttercup....not even worthy of a rebuttal.

Talk about a stupid stance!!!


I just hope a family member of your gets killed one day, or raped, and the perp gets released REAL early.

A stupid stance you say ??? lol

 

[mur11]

Good
Mandatory Minimums are barbaric, and tend to fall most heavy on the poor, uneducated and the petty criminals.
The real criminals are punished accordingly, not by the mandatory minimums.

Remember the true purpose of the correctional system should be rehabilitative, not punitive. Mandatory minimums ensure that petty criminals have a chance to grow into hardened criminals and that the politicians do not have to tackle the root causes of crime, and instead focus on punishment.

 

[mur11]

Oh buttercup....not even worthy of a rebuttal.

Talk about a stupid stance!!!


I just hope a family member of your gets killed one day, or raped, and the perp gets released REAL early.

Wow, you really are quite the asshole
And not even an intelligent one, just a bitter prick

Seriously man, give your head a shake and read again what you just wrote.
Contemptible

 

[fmahovalich]

I suspect it will get overturned.

otherwise, with this line of thinking, Judges are 'handcuffed' and we will have to get rid of Maximums as well.

 

[blackrock13]

Mandatory minimums are reactionary and for lazy politicians looking to score some quick votes.

A JUDGE should do just that, JUDGE, and determine what the APPROPRIATE penalty is. Not be handcuffed in advance by a bunch of politicians who have never stepped foot inside a court room.

:thumb:

 

[blackrock13]

The USA has a similar mandatory minimum for their so called war on drugs. The only people that end up with a ridiculous minimum sentence are those people who are unable to roll over and rat out a bigger fish in the drug distribution scheme. So it is the end buyer of the product who ends up getting screwed in this case.

So your comment about gangsters getting out earlier, is spot on. They also may not even go to jail in the first place.

Cheers

What if some future wannabe government campaigned on reintroducing slavery? Let's say they proposed to designate as slaves some downtrodden minority group. Let's say the people of this land wanted and voted in a party who they thought would make it possible for us to own those people as slaves, and let's say they did just that.

Wouldn't you want a court system that could undo that new law, and declare it unconstitutional?

You are such an ignorant buffoon. Google "Ontario Court of Appeal" and "Canada Court System" and then post again and tell us what the Ontario Court of Appeal is and where it ranks in the hierarchy of courts.

And BTW, Keebler has it right.

A stupid stance you say ??? lol

Wow, you really are quite the asshole
And not even an intelligent one, just a bitter prick

Seriously man, give your head a shake and read again what you just wrote.
Contemptible

Truly an ignorant comment that a moderator should deal with. Do yourself a favour and delete or edit that comment

Now then, let's not allow truth and accuracy to get in the way of some good sensationalism.
This was a set of 6 cases that were heard by a 5 judge panel. Normally only 3 judges hear an appeal but the court recognized the importance of these matters.

If you are interested links to the actual decisions not newspaper accounts are included and I suggest you read the actual decision not the nonsense that is being spun.

I'll split them into 6 posts for easier reading

#1

R. v. Rocheleau - result is that after the appeal he gets the same jail time​

​

http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2013/2013ONCA0679.htm
pled guilty to 24 charges arising out of four robberies and three break and enters
received sentences totalling seven years and nine months’ imprisonment, having been given three months’ credit for his pre-sentence custody. He appeals conviction and sentence.
after the appeal striking the mandatory minimum laws what did the court give him

"Having regard to the circumstances of these offences and the mitigating factors identified by the trial judge, the total sentence imposed – eight years less three months’ credit for time served – remains appropriate and fitting"

Careful gang, you may be accused of being for them or against them.

 

[JohnC]

Maybe it's time to examine the constitution a bit better than when it was initially drafted. Seems to me recently almost everything is against the constitution and the charter of rights!

 

[fmahovalich]

My post simply makes a point. It's easy to get on here and bash the Conservatives and politicize a ruling when we are all so removed from it and unaffected.

but I have made the point before about my own daughter being raped...or suggesting it here.....that when it personally affects a person....we would all change our minds.

 

[nottyboi]

#2
R v. Meszaros - result, the appeal of the sentence was dismissed - he goes to jail for 1 year

http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2013/2013ONCA0682.htm

short version, 60 year old man he lives in the country with his wife, 2 kids went on his land to fish in his pond, he grabbed his shotgun and fired it at them.
no criminal record, clearly not a gang banger

"I would grant leave to appeal sentence but dismiss the sentence appeal"

In singapore this guy would be facing the death penalty...

 

[nottyboi]

For the most part judges do a good job, if we select judges properly, and monitor their trials to ensure their sentences are reasonable, that is all that should be required. Why hire a wise and experienced person, make them listen to all the facts of the case and then tie their hands. For the most part I think Judges in Canada do a reasonable job in sentencing. Where they really need to improve are all the pre trial motions and BS that delay trials.