Covicted FENTANYL Dealer gets probation

[Ken7]

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news ... -directive


A Provincial Court judge has ignored a B.C. Court of Appeal directive and given a 21-year-old dial-a-dope fentanyl dealer a suspended sentence with three years’ probation instead of jail time.

Wow, that should send a clean message that selling drugs just is not acceptable.

[Carrs Landing Viking]

Throw the lame judge in jail for stupidity.

[LordEd]

Here's the decision: http://canlii.ca/t/h8z30

Basically 19 year old, no other criminal record.

[Ken7]

Here's the decision: http://canlii.ca/t/h8z30

Basically 19 year old, no other criminal record.

Ok, same 19 year old shoots his neighbor? IS there really any difference? He just hasn't been caught before you don't just wake up one morning and start selling drugs.

I'm sorry, I disagree with the decision.

[jimmy4321]

It's an insane decision.
I say whatever you believe should be the penalty for dealing Fentanyl should be the same penalty for dealing ANY hard drugs.

[LordEd]

I'm sorry, I disagree with the decision.

Fair enough. I think it's important to read the decision before condemning it.

My summary is oversimplified.

[LordEd]

] Mr. Joon was 19 at the time of the offences and is now 21. He graduated from Grade 12. He lives at home with his parents and sister. His upbringing was positive and he was well provided for. After completing high school, Mr. Joon engaged in various forms of unskilled employment. His counsel submitted that his client was uncertain about his future and lacking in direction at the time of the offence which likely made him more vulnerable to influence. More recently, including at the time of the offence, Mr. Joon has been employed as a lot boy at a car dealership. He took on a second job as a lot boy but had to give that up due to the demands of his current course work. In January of 2017, he began an educational program to become an electrician and is now in his second year of training.

[11] The offender has no criminal history. He does not use street drugs and is a social drinker. He does not have any physical or mental health concerns. It is clear that Mr. Joon became involved in trafficking solely for the purpose of monetary gain.

[12] Mr. Joon reports that he became involved in the offence before the court as a result of associating with negative peers from high school. He now realizes he was immature, easily influenced by these people, and did not think about the consequences of his actions. He has distanced himself from them and socializes only with pro-social peers and new friends he has met through his schooling. He has also focused his energy on fitness and sports. A number of letters were filed which support that, aside from his involvement in this offence, Mr. Joon is a pro-social, well-adjusted and kind person who is well liked and respected by his friends, family and colleagues at his work and school. It is clear this offence was out of character for him.

[13] Mr. Joon is understandably experiencing anxiety about the potential consequences of his criminal conduct. His father is aware of his criminal matter but his mother is unaware as Mr. Joon has not wanted her to worry about him. He appreciates he has caused his father and younger sister stress. He also caused his family significant financial loss due to the confiscation of his father’s vehicle following his arrest. He plans to repay his father for the value of the vehicle and the costs of his legal representation in this matter. He is remorseful and understands the errors of his ways. He says he has matured and is focused on his education and his future. He now wishes only to “right my wrongs”.

I'm posting for discussion not defending or attacking either position. Does any of this make a difference to anyone?

[Smurf]

Not one bit. The Bacon brothers lived at home. How do we know what the atmosphere is in his home. If it was that good I would think he would not have gotten into trouble in the first place. He should spend some serious time. Selling fentanyl is like attempted murder as far as I am concerned. He was an adult and knew what he was doing. We are getting away to easy on these people.

[bob vernon]

Bring back the lash. If these leftist bleeding heart do-gooder judges are so concerned about overcrowded jails, let's just have a sentence administered, and in public, too. A few lashes when he begins his probation.

[LordEd]

[44] The Crown argues that Mr. Joon has failed to fully accept responsibility for the consequences of his actions and has not expressed true remorse. They point to the fact that in his letter to the court, Mr. Joon does not refer to the potential that he may have contributed to any deaths which may have resulted from his trafficking. They say that Mr. Joon’s letter to the court and those filed in support of him focus on the negative consequences to him and not on the lethal nature of the substance he was trafficking. I do not agree there is a lack of remorse or understanding demonstrated such that it should impact my consideration of whether there are exceptional circumstances justifying a non-custodial disposition. The offender speaks of his overwhelming guilt and shame. He says he recognizes that what he did was wrong and that he feels terrible for what he has done to the community. His actions since his arrest should carry the greatest weight rather than the words he has used to attempt to express his state of mind.
[45] When members of the public consider the sentence which will be imposed in this matter, the court should not be seen to be minimizing the very grave consequences flowing from the presence of fentanyl in our communities and the continuing tragic loss of life it is causing. The courts are also fully conscious of the toll fentanyl is taking of our first responders, medical system, and community based support services. People who manufacture and distribute fentanyl are utterly lacking in morals. As was said in Smith, it is a scourge. Those who traffic in opiates, cocaine, and synthetic drugs such as methamphetamines have long been described by the courts as “Merchants of Misery”. I think it is now apt to describe those who traffic in fentanyl as “Merchants of Death”.
[46] Despite this courts’ awareness of the above issues and the pressing need for sentences which will serve to denounce and deter those introducing fentanyl into our society, the court must still carefully weigh and consider all the principles of sentence as set out in the Criminal Code and CDSA, the case law which has interpreted those principles, the circumstances of the offence and the offender and impose a sentence which will best serve the overarching fundamental purpose of sentencing which is “to protect society and contribute…to respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by imposing just sanctions…”
[47] It is the view of this court that Mr. Joon’s circumstances should be considered, at law, to be exceptional. I find these exceptional circumstances justify a sentence outside the range of 18 to 36 months and that a period of incarceration is not appropriate. I find the principles of denunciation and general deterrence can be met through the imposition of a lengthy suspended sentence with terms which will address the protection of the public and assure this offender continued reintegration into society.
[48] There will be a suspended sentence with probation for three years. The ancillary orders for a DNA sample, a s. 109 prohibition, and forfeiture of the items seized save for the vehicle are granted. The application for the forfeiture of the vehicle will be adjourned.

[TylerM4]

Unless you're willing to increase the penalty for drug dealing in general, I fail to see the complaint.

Many different drugs out there that will kill you if you take too much. I see no evidence that dealer was selling fentanyl as heroin or misleading his customers.

[my5cents]

I guess, like many other sentences, it's time for a minimum sentence.

I just love it when the government announce that the maximum sentence for something is going up, and the sheepeople, say "oh that's good, the government is getting tough". Ah, no, it doesn't matter what the maximum is when the judges are handing out slaps on the wrists.

This malarkey that his defense consul spewed he's this, he's that, he just found God, whatever, is the same BS that is heard at every trial before sentencing.

I've heard hundreds and hundreds and haven't yet heard a defense lawyer not explain that his client is next to sainthood since his "mistake".

When he's convicted again, and he will be, what do you figure, 6 months served at home ?

[Ken7]

I'm sorry, I disagree with the decision.

Fair enough. I think it's important to read the decision before condemning it.

My summary is oversimplified.

I guess with a greater understanding of law one might feel the way I do. He is guilty of trafficking in a drug which is know to kill. End of story, don't care is he is young and it is his first offense. For your info, I read the case.

[LordEd]

Yep. There was no question of guilt. The link was the argument given for the application of sentencing.

And there's no exact right answer. It becomes a question of whether a suspended sentence is a deterrent or if a fixed in prisonment is needed to be effective (as is the consensus voiced here).

[dogspoiler]

It is my understanding that sentencing is supposed to achieve some goals.

Punishing the criminal.
Keeping the criminal out of circulation and out of business for a while.
To instill some respect or fear of the consequences to others that would do the same.

It seems that none of these goals are met by this decision.