Cycle Logic Justice Travesty

[Donald G]

The fact that a person charged with 17 charges would be released on Bail pending trial is just the latest in the long running saga identifying that some of our Criminal Court Justices are completely out of touch with reality. That the owner of Cycle Logic was released with conditions that enabled him to continue committing criminal offenses while on bail compounds the judicial stupidity.

What possible justification could the courts have to release a person facing numerous charges and links to the Nanaimo and Calgary Chapters of the Hells Angels and the Throttle Lockers and Kingpin Crew Gangs from Kelowna? If such judges are afraid to do their job properly or are simply lacking in an understanding of the realities of a person living a real life criminal lifestyle being released on bail is of no concern. The result is the same. The person released is free to continue to prey on society until his/her trial because of the negligence of the courts.

Why should the police have to expend the time and resources to repeatedly catch and charge such criminals over and over and over again before our Criminal Court System even gets around to hearing the long past first offenses on which the accused people have been released pending trial? Another example of why our Criminal Court System is more and more being considered a joke by those who used to be able to rely on them to protect society from crime and criminals.

[watchkat]

My question is what is this "his lawyer states they have been working on a plea bargain". This prior to the latest arrest this weekend. What exactly does someone have to do to get the full sentence that is stated in the Canadian Criminal Codes?

What slap on the wrist are they working on? I'm sick of the maneuvering that goes on and have to wonder if money changes hands in these dealings. Are judges too afraid to sentence, is Crown Counsel afraid to stand up to the charges they lay?

Why do we have laws and state sentences if they are never used. The precedents are used and then one case that is lightly sentenced becomes the precedent that is used for other cases. Can't a judge say enough already the minimum/maximum is this and I using them, not Judge Whobegone's prior sentence?

Just asking.........

[Hassel99]

The fact that a person charged with 17 charges would be released on Bail pending trial is just the latest in the long running saga identifying that some of our Criminal Court Justices are completely out of touch with reality. That the owner of Cycle Logic was released with conditions that enabled him to continue committing criminal offenses while on bail compounds the judicial stupidity.

What possible justification could the courts have to release a person facing numerous charges and links to the Nanaimo and Calgary Chapters of the Hells Angels and the Throttle Lockers and Kingpin Crew Gangs from Kelowna? If such judges are afraid to do their job properly or are simply lacking in an understanding of the realities of a person living a real life criminal lifestyle being released on bail is of no concern. The result is the same. The person released is free to continue to prey on society until his/her trial because of the negligence of the courts.

Why should the police have to expend the time and resources to repeatedly catch and charge such criminals over and over and over again before our Criminal Court System even gets around to hearing the long past first offenses on which the accused people have been released pending trial? Another example of why our Criminal Court System is more and more being considered a joke by those who used to be able to rely on them to protect society from crime and criminals.

So you are not a fan of "innocent until proven guilty?"

[Donald G]

To Hassel99 ... When the amount of evidence available to the judge hearing the release application is overwhelming, I think the issue of the protection of the accused as opposed to the protection of society has to be weighed on a balance of probabilities rather than beyond any reasonable doubt.

Disallowing evidence on technical or theoretical grounds should NOT form part of the judges decision as to whether or not to release a charged person. The fact that such nonsense is permitted at trial is an ongoing travesty since the Canadian Bill of Rights was rewritten and reinterpreted during the Trudeau years is bad enough, without knowingly adding the opportunity of criminals to further harm society ... or actually kill someone, like the "arrested multiple times" father in Merritt.

[driveangry]

Maybe they let him out so that the "organized crime gangs" with save the tax payers money and take care of him. He must be willing to give up something for a plea bargain.

[Hassel99]

Donald, IMO the only way to protect society is to protect the accused. I think we disagree on what exactly we are protecting society from. Due Process is the hallmark of a civilized Society.

[tgm929]

Donald, IMO the only way to protect society is to protect the accused. I think we disagree on what exactly we are protecting society from. Due Process is the hallmark of a civilized Society.

Actually, in most cases society needs to be protected from the accused.

What does due process have to do with bail?

[my5cents]

To Hassel99 ... When the amount of evidence available to the judge hearing the release application is overwhelming, I think the issue of the protection of the accused as opposed to the protection of society has to be weighed on a balance of probabilities rather than beyond any reasonable doubt.

Disallowing evidence on technical or theoretical grounds should NOT form part of the judges decision as to whether or not to release a charged person. The fact that such nonsense is permitted at trial is an ongoing travesty since the Canadian Bill of Rights was rewritten and reinterpreted during the Trudeau years is bad enough, without knowingly adding the opportunity of criminals to further harm society ... or actually kill someone, like the "arrested multiple times" father in Merritt.

Actually the Canadian Bill of Rights, enacted by Diefenbaker's government in 1960, is still in effect and was not rewritten or reinterpreted, I think you may be thinking of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, enacted in 1982.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, commonly called "the Charter" or "Charter rights", is the act that mandates that we have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty though out this great country, well except for MVA offences in BC, that is.

Actually I believe release of an accused is the general rule and the crown must show a reason to keep someone in custody. In the case of Mr. Newcome he was not charged with hurting anyone, just property offences. It would be very unlikely to keep someone charged with property crimes in jail as long as they met the criteria.

[Donald G]

To my5cents ... Are you saying that 17 criminal property offenses is not hurting anyone? Obviously you have never discovered your vehicle stolen as you went outside to drive it to work, or had your house broken into and family keepsakes stolen. You either have to be a lawyer or person who has never had a crime committed against you or your family.

Committing a criminal act against a person or their property IS harming someone.

The Rules of Evidence that the Criminal Courts presently go by is now based on the Reinterpretation of our Canadian Rights due to our Canadian Rights being REINTERPRETED when the Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into being. One significant difference is that under the interpretation of the Diefenbaker Bill of Rights ALL EVIDENCE THAT TENDED TO PROVE GUILT OR INNOCENCE *WAS* ADMISSIBLE INTO COURT.

Under the present REINTERPRETATION of the Charter each and every article of evidence can be individually examined and only those articles that, in the personal opinion of the presiding judge was properly and reasonably seized is admitted. Because individual judges differ on what is reasonable, entering evidence during an investigation becomes a crap shoot for the police. For example the large number of theoretical and technical defenses made available to lawyers defending impaired driving charges under the Criminal Code made such charges all but unenforseable. Over 1,000 innocent mothers, fathers, sons and daughters continue to die each year, in part because of the protection such drivers receive under the new interpretation of our Canadian Rights.

The new interpretation also protects criminals and gangs from being arbitrarily stopped and checked. The largest heroin seizure ever made in Saskatchewan and a similar gang related pile of weapons were dismissed because, in the opinion of the presiding judge the police did not have reasonable grounds to search stop and search the vehicles involved. More serious criminal charges are thrown out on that "new" grounds than are thrown out for almost any other reason, something that did not happen under the Diefenbaker Bill of Rights.

The number of successful apeals is evidence of the sometimes wide difference of opinion judges have regarding the matter, making it a lawyers goldmine in billable hours.

[Bsuds]

I believe he is talking physical injury. Not that I agree with that either but those are the laws we go by.

[Donald G]

To Bsuds ... The criminal laws and rules of evidence evolving from the various judicial interpretations of those laws have changed hundreds, if not thousands of times over the approximately 150,000 years that reasonably modern humans have been on earth. Many of them have been documented in the 12,000 years since the first writing appeared.

Canada itself has had at least four such "judicial" systems since we came into being as a country. Those based on the judicial interpretation of the Diefenbaker Bill of Rights and the more recently written, far more extreme, PET Charter of Rights and its interpretation are IMO simply four more badly faulted judicial systems being tried out in our march toward significantly increasing evolutionary intelligence.

[Bpeep]

So this loser was knowingly running a chop shop and since he plead out and has no prior record, crown recommends a conditional sentence?
Geez us.
Only in canada.
Shame on you, justice system.

http://www.castanet.net/news/West-Kelow ... -sentenced

[Hmmm]

So this loser was knowingly running a chop shop and since he plead out and has no prior record, crown recommends a conditional sentence?
Geez us.
Only in canada.
Shame on you, justice system.

http://www.castanet.net/news/West-Kelow ... -sentenced

$500 fine for three bags of cocaine.

[sassybee]

Wasn't this guy just in the news again a few months ago, for being caught with stolen vehicles on his property in Peachland? I thought it was somewhere on Beach ave. So we have a court date, but then we continue to do the same "business" at another location?

[watchkat]

You don't suppose this Attorney General will have the guts to step in on this obvious travesty to the justice system? It has been done before and this wreaks of something not being right or fair to other criminals who have sentences much greater for minor crimes.

No priors? That just means it has taken them a longer time to discover his years of crimes and being able to charge him. This wasn't "he stole and car, painted it and resold it".......this was a business of multiples.