Locals charged with child porn

[Bibbs]

"Considering that statistically around 30 out of every 100 people charged with a crime is found innocent that means that a very, very large number of truly innocent people will suffer irreversible"

Just another view on this from someone who worked in a jail for 12 years. This may well be the stats but too often it is who has the better lawyer. On numerous occasions, inmates would brag about how their lawyer got them off on charges for various reasons even though they told there lawyer they committed the crimes. So those stats you have to take with a bit of grain of salt. Its not a perfect system but I don't think one is possible.

[LANDM]

Considering that statistically around 30 out of every 100 people charged with a crime is found innocent that means that a very, very large number of truly innocent people will suffer irreversible, "life-as-they-know-it ending" harm because ignorance and fear are used to justify turning a blind eye to basic human rights.
.

Nobody is found innocent. Ever.
They can only be found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That has little to do with being innocent of what they were originally charged.

Yes, there will be truly innocent people out there who were charged with crimes, some wrongly found guilty and some found not guilty.
But, there will also, in your claimed statistic above, be those who have perpetrated crimes and found not guilty due to the inability to prove their guilt, or because of legal technicalities which disallow a conviction or even of a trial.
Presumption of innocence does not equal innocence.

[Bpeep]

removed. Has nothing to do with the topic.

[nextimeround]

Nobody is found innocent. Ever.
They can only be found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That has little to do with being innocent of what they were originally charged.

Yes, there will be truly innocent people out there who were charged with crimes, some wrongly found guilty and some found not guilty.
But, there will also, in your claimed statistic above, be those who have perpetrated crimes and found not guilty due to the inability to prove their guilt, or because of legal technicalities which disallow a conviction or even of a trial.
Presumption of innocence does not equal innocence.

I beg to differ (surprise surprise). An acquittal is equivalent to being found innocent of all charges. There are as you say many reasons to be found not guilty and yes some, maybe even many are actually guilty despite this finding. The court system is far from perfect but at least in those cases the defendant has had a chance to defend themselves with evidence. The alternative, that seems to be what you favor, is that anyone charged with a crime is most likely guilty and as such we should treat them that way.

[nextimeround]

nexttimearound, you keep talking about the quality of hatred being behind intolerance - whether those comments are directed at me or anyone I can only answer for me. I don't hate anybody.

I don't have tolerance for pedophilia. I don't believe there is any "right" time for it. I don't believe hatred is behind intolerance. Fear and anger is behind intolerance - mine anyway, and the perpetrator's lack of compassion and empathy for a child involved as a victim in pedophilia is equally met with my (and others) intolerance. I have tons of compassion and empathy for another human being, but I have none for a pedo.

There is nothing wrong with intolerance for heinous crimes. It delineates boundaries of acceptable behaviour. By implying there should be tolerance for pedophiliacs (whatever they're called) tells me we should accept them and their mentally ill behaviour. For me, I will never do that.

Never.

Intolerance for people charged with a crime, any crime, or for any condition (ethnic, mental capacity, etc.) is the problem here. Not accepting excuses or tolerating the act of this terrible crime is totally okay by me and I applaud that. I did not imply, or at least did not intend to imply, that you should be tolerant of the crime.

What I've said all along is that you cannot allow this anger and fear of this despicable crime or the people who commit it, to conclude that anyone charged with it must therefore be guilty. By extension anything that happens to them they had coming. I say bull to that.

Terrorism is heinous. We should not tolerate it but to read your and my emails, to tap our phones to allow the circumvention of every citizens rights so that we somehow feel safer, that's worse than the crime itself.

[nextimeround]

I have no idea if he is innocent or guilty either. It seems most have an opinion, but that's just conjecture at this time. However, what you are saying is if the probability is high then the suspect is held, and if the probability is low then the suspect is free until trial? And this probability is arrived at by the opinion of a judge based on the initial evidence and the potential risk to the public? But in both cases their innocence is presumed? And the fact a judge decides this before trial might be open to an arguable Charter of Rights ifraction. No wonder the Court of Public Opinion is so heated. Maybe there should have been mandatory law classes in high school so the non-lawyerly amongst us might have a remote chance at understanding how the system works. Sorry, but to me anything that requires lawyers requires the knowledge of their own language which is always open to interpretation.

No, that's not what I'm saying and actually don't know how you could have concluded that from my post? Suspects aren't held due to the probability of their guilt or innocence. Some reasons they may be held in custody might include the potential risk to the public as concluded by a judge after hearing some level of evidence to support and/or refute this. They may also be held due to risk of flight based again on evidence and information presented to a judge. The police have limited powers to hold a suspect and for good reasons. In all these cases the suspect is indeed presumed innocent until they are proven guilty through due process. It is indeed the judges opinion that makes the decision of risk to public or of flight, or any other matter.

Let me know when you graduate that course on law so that I can suggest a course on reading comprehension.

[nextimeround]

There seems to be some belief that to stand up for Canadian rights is akin to supporting criminals and worse. I posted way too many times to try and get this point across - the dangers of allowing fear, anger and hatred to justify the circumvention of due process. I'm sure if you asked any average Canadian they would express their dismay with the legal system. Guilty people getting off on technicalities, etc. If you asked those same people what their confidence was in the police "getting it right" that too would be low. So we can conclude there are problems all around. Nothing new there.

With all these problems it has never been more important for us to fight the urge to give up these rights in favor of a fabricated sense of well being. We have to put faith in due process and make changes to that process to stop the miscarriage of justice whether for or against.

[maryjane48]

There seems to be some belief that to stand up for Canadian rights is akin to supporting criminals and worse. I posted way too many times to try and get this point across - the dangers of allowing fear, anger and hatred to justify the circumvention of due process. I'm sure if you asked any average Canadian they would express their dismay with the legal system. Guilty people getting off on technicalities, etc. If you asked those same people what their confidence was in the police "getting it right" that too would be low. So we can conclude there are problems all around. Nothing new there.

With all these problems it has never been more important for us to fight the urge to give up these rights in favor of a fabricated sense of well being. We have to put faith in due process and make changes to that process to stop the miscarriage of justice whether for or against.

well sorry to inform you but if you play with fire you could get burned , meaning the courts will decide guilty or innocent , but us the public can think anything we like, opinions are part of free speech , and some crimes such as child porn really *bleep* most everyone off , its way of the world , not fair, but thats way she goes boys to quote ray from trailer park boys :)

[nextimeround]

well sorry to inform you but if you play with fire you could get burned , meaning the courts will decide guilty or innocent , but us the public can think anything we like, opinions are part of free speech , and some crimes such as child porn really *bleep* most everyone off , its way of the world , not fair, but thats way she goes boys to quote ray from trailer park boys :)

Exactly why the public should not be told of every charge laid. Due to being "*bleep* off" you/we lack the fundamental ability to remain objective. In turn every suspect charged in a crime that the world happens to be "*bleep* off" at is therefore stripped of their basic rights and anyone who is actually innocent pays the price. The way of the world - only if you let it. And, getting burnt playing with fire presupposes the person named in the media actually played with fire.

[omisimaw]

There seems to be some belief that to stand up for Canadian rights is akin to supporting criminals and worse. I posted way too many times to try and get this point across - the dangers of allowing fear, anger and hatred to justify the circumvention of due process. I'm sure if you asked any average Canadian they would express their dismay with the legal system. Guilty people getting off on technicalities, etc. If you asked those same people what their confidence was in the police "getting it right" that too would be low. So we can conclude there are problems all around. Nothing new there.

With all these problems it has never been more important for us to fight the urge to give up these rights in favor of a fabricated sense of well being. We have to put faith in due process and make changes to that process to stop the miscarriage of justice whether for or against.

well sorry to inform you but if you play with fire you could get burned , meaning the courts will decide guilty or innocent , but us the public can think anything we like, opinions are part of free speech , and some crimes such as child porn really *bleep* most everyone off , its way of the world , not fair, but thats way she goes boys to quote ray from trailer park boys :)

Actually you do not have the right of free speech when a person goes through the system and is found not guilty. No matter what the crime if you still take the opinion the person is guilty of the crime and you speak about it that person could easily take issue and take YOU to court.
Any bets when that happens you will be screaming you are innocent, until such time as the court decides otherwise.
Free speech is not all that free, it comes with responsibility.

[maryjane48]

No matter what the crime if you still take the opinion the person is guilty of the crime and you speak about it that person could easily take issue and take YOU to court.

just because someone is found not guilty means they are actually guilty , might mean good lawyer,and for certain crimes , if a person on bail, we should know who it is . i don't care you do not like that, infact i smile when thinking about it

[averagejoe]

I've said it before...this is bigger than you think.

Another one close to home.....

Joshua James Roberts, 38, has been charged with sexual exploitation, child luring, possession of child pornography, invitation to sexual touching and assault with a weapon.

According to court documents obtained by Castanet, the offences took place in Summerland between March 1, 2011 and Sept. 1, 2013.

Roberts was originally arrested by RCMP in Sumerland in October of this year, but was released without being charge.


http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-st ... htm#128668

I wonder if he knows Dave Preston?

[the truth]

one by one they fall

[Randall T]

Let me know when you graduate that course on law so that I can suggest a course on reading comprehension.

Wow, not sure how to respond to that. I guess I'll concede on this subject as I haven't taken up law as a hobby and obviously couldn't comprehend the material anyway. As far as further education goes, don't bother suggesting a course as I already have one that I won't have to spend the rest of my days sorting through tediously mundane material.

Being somewhat of a conservative redneck from the prairies, I have a slight problem with the way our justice system has progressed and think that every so often people who break the law are simply in dire need of a good old fashioned asskicking. There is no healthy balance between left and right anymore as far as our justice system goes.

I think the only ones who will comprehend what I'm saying will be other conservative rednecks, so I'll forgive you if it slips by.

Cheers.

[nextimeround]

Wow, not sure how to respond to that. I guess I'll concede on this subject as I haven't taken up law as a hobby and obviously couldn't comprehend the material anyway. As far as further education goes, don't bother suggesting a course as I already have one that I won't have to spend the rest of my days sorting through tediously mundane material.

Being somewhat of a conservative redneck from the prairies, I have a slight problem with the way our justice system has progressed and think that every so often people who break the law are simply in dire need of a good old fashioned asskicking. There is no healthy balance between left and right anymore as far as our justice system goes.

I think the only ones who will comprehend what I'm saying will be other conservative rednecks, so I'll forgive you if it slips by.

Cheers.

Can't disagree with anything you've said here. I too feel this way and I'll bet the majority of Canadians, liberal or conservative minded (politics aside). My issue is in the time between being charged and having our so called day in court. If the accused was charged with theft of a loaf of bread there wouldn't be much worry but when it's the type of charge that will almost certainly cost the accused their job, family and friends then I think there has to be a different approach. And because I can't single handedly change the law I choose to try and help others see the problem in jumping to conclusions.