Laura Szendrei’s killer sentenced as an adult

 

Laura Szendrei’s killer sentenced as an adult

http://www.news1130.com/2013/10/18/laura-szendreis-killer-sentenced-as-an-adult/

When the accused  committed second-degree murder in a sexually-motivated attack three years ago in Delta, he was 6days shy from his 18th However, he got sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for seven years, which is a sentence possible for an adult. The judge showed many reasons why he chose to make this decision, such as psychiatric reports and numerous experts and witnesses who were called in the case. Also, many community members in Delta said that they are still affected by this incident even after 3years.

I'm glad that the judge made such a decision. When I read the tweets that Andrea Mac made saying, "When young man finished murder he threw up, wiped off his pipe and played video games. Days after murder accused went to bday party and trip to Mexico." I could see how the psychiatric reports supported to give him a sentence as an adult. According to the judge, he had a really corrupted mind of hoping to become comfortable around girls and have sex properly. Even if he had those 6days to reconsider about his thoughts and decisions, his opinion wouldn't have changed as an action to commit such a crime like that takes a long consideration, and he probably had a long time to think and plan. His equipments, zap straps and pipe were prepared in his bag and in his hand, and an attempt to rape a woman before the killing of was proven, meaning he really had fixed his mind on to committing such a cruel action. Killer apparently hoped to give random victim amnesia so she wouldn't remember sex assault. Therefore, such a mens rea was right to be punished strongly, as it was very wrong, and the society would have risked being harm if he wasn't prisoned.

I would definitely check out the killer's name on Jan 24th when the application to lift the publication ban goes to court. Such ill guy's name should be allowed to publish as soon as he gets his sentencing done.

Adult sentencing in Juveniles (Laura Szendrei)

http://www.news1130.com/2013/10/18/laura-szendreis-killer-sentenced-as-an-adult/

In September 2010, 15 year old teenager Laura Szendrei was walking through Delta's Mackie Park when she was attacked in an unprovoked incident by a 17 year old individual. Telling police that he had intended to knock her unconscious before raping her, the perpetrator struck Szendrei in the head with a metal bar in the struggle, resulting in her death. At the time, he was 6 days short of his 18th birthday, hence legally a minor. After a 5 month investigation and an undercover sting, the perpetrator was arrested by the RCMP.

After an almost 3 year trial, Laura Szendrei's killer was sentenced to life imprisonment with no chance of parole for 7 years. Although technically 17 at the time, the perpetrator was sentenced according to adult guidelines. Reasons cited for this decision included the randomness and brutality of the crime, as well as his proximity to legal age. Canada's legal code includes provisions for sentencing accordingly for both youth and adults, with lesser sentences for youth. The decision in the Laura Szendrei case to charge the perpetrator with an adult sentence shows that these provisions are not absolute, and are instead guidelines due to assumptions about lessening of responsibility, culpability, and propensity for violence and reeducation. In this particular case, the perpetrator was shown to effectively have the mindset and decisions of an adult due to the facts of the crime and state of the individual.

Environmental Issues Are Getting Heated Up

Article: http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/10/30/groups-argue-bc-not-protecting-old-growth-forest

       A conflict arose between environmentalist groups in British Columbia, and the government over the Douglas fir forest on the southeast Vancouver Island. Environmentalists argued that the provincial government is simply not doing enough work to protect the Douglas fir, which are identified to be a part of the endangered ecosystem. The article does not contain many details of the case, but an interesting point can be observed from the case itself.

      Imagine hearing this issue a few decades ago, perhaps 2-3, before the environmental issues became a point of concern. The case would not go to an extent where it would make an appearance in the provincial Supreme Court, as it would be deemed to be unimportant and trivial. Laws regarding environmental issues have been set according to the wishes of the now- outdated society. As the new millennium started, global warming, as well as other environmental issues started to slip into society. A decade and three years later, it has become the movement of the century, and has changed society's perspective of the environment entirely. It is no longer unimportant and trivial, but the exact opposite. It did not take society long to accept environmental problems to be one of their highest priorities, but the same cannot be said for the legislative branch of government.

     Laws cannot and should not undergo change as quickly as society. If it was to change so frequently, coinciding with society's impulses at every moment, laws would lose their meaning, and create chaos. Unfortunately, this nature of law is what creates conflicts like the one stated in the source article. The justice system, as well as the legislative branch are not as ready to tackle these environmental problems as society would like them to be. The final outcome of this case, as well as the others that resemble, will tell us exactly what level of preparedness the government is at about environmental issues at our current time.

Langley School Districts to Install Cameras on Buses

How would you feel, if your every little movement was recorded, and you were constantly being watched by someone you didn't know? I personally, value my privacy. The world of 1984 by George Orwell is horrifying enough; I would like that type of society to stay fiction, not become increasingly realistic.

Recently, the Langley School District has proposed a novel idea -- to install surveillance cameras in its whole fleet of buses. Among the reasons the district is considering to install cameras is to monitor the conduct of the bus drivers. However, with an already safe record of school bus drivers, it is hard to detect the motivation behind such a plan. If there were incidents where the bus drivers have engaged in inappropriate action, then it may serve as sufficient evidence for the plan of installing cameras.

Others may say that issues such as bullying may arise on school buses, and it is important that there are cameras to record that. However, there is no point of the cameras when the bus driver can monitor the children. Say if there were cameras on the bus, it would not better help the driver aid the situation. As well, the bus driver has the responsibility of driving the students safely to school, so they should be focusing on the road rather than on driving and surveillance concurrently.


An even more pressing issue is the violation of privacy rights. By constantly monitoring the students, the school district is stripping away the students' inherent right to privacy. Regardless of the school district’s that the surveillance cameras are important to protecting the safety of the students, we should not sacrifice the privacy of all students for a very small minority.

The school district has not been able to provide ample arguments to substantiate the need for surveillance cameras in buses. Not only is it not justified, it also violates a fundamental right -- that of privacy. If cameras were to be installed, it will no doubt lead to much controversy from parents and public alike. Like what Josh Paterson of the BC Civil Liberties Associations has said, “We don’t think that it’s proper for kids to just have videos trained on them at all times, regardless of what they are doing, regardless of what the risks are.”

Current Events Responses - Langley School District considers cameras on full bus fleet

            The Langley School District wanted to install surveillance cameras inside school buses, in an effort to raise security and safety.  Though the district and the school board refuse to inform the public about adding this new gadget, they “insist it’s not yet a done deal.” Most schools districts in Metro Vancouver do not have cameras installed in the buses, but the Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows School District recognizes the fact that they have surveillance cameras on their school buses.

The concept of having cameras equipped on school buses to monitor the students is very interesting, however, it is a concept that I find it difficult to agree with.  I would like to analyze the purpose of these add-ons.  The article states that these “equipment[s] would enhance safety, deter bad behaviour, and help address driver problems.” The reasons are justified and are completely valid, yet, I want to question the effectiveness of these cameras.  For instance, how can the driver monitor during student behaviors when he/she is focused on transporting the passengers safely to their destination.  It is simply too dangerous and stressful for the bus driver to pay attention to two things at once for a period of time. Even though these cameras could be a good way to watch if the bus driver is driving safely and being nice to the students, I feel these cameras are overkilling the situation, since these cameras will be monitoring every action of the students on the bus, leaving the students with little to no privacy.

 It is evident that all the students know there are cameras around the school to watch our behaviours, thus, I thoroughly believe that it is unnecessary for the school to know our every move when we are in school buses.  I would like to direct your attention to video (1), which is a video made by a company that produces bus cameras.  This video focuses on the quality of the camera and the scene of the bus from the camera’s perspective.  I would like to point out that the video clearly shows every single movement of the children near the camera, while the movements of the students at the back of the bus were hindered by seats.  This brings back my previous question on the effectiveness of the video camera.  Evidently, the range it can spot things precisely is still lacking.  On an even more serious note, the viewers can easily see the faces of the students near the camera.  In a sense, their identity is being exposed because anyone who can view these videos is able to clearly see their faces.  Josh Paterson of the BC Civil Liberties Association expressed a similar opinion as mine, as he stated “(…) [w]e think it’s a violation of students’ privacy rights.”  Clearly, the idea of having surveillance on school buses concerns organizations such as BC Civil Liberties Association.  He also added that it is improper for kids to have “have videos trained on them at all times.”  I believe that students will not be able to act freely anymore because they are scared that any of their actions would be caught on tape, thus, resulting him or her being in trouble.  Despite the fact that these cameras keep the school a safer place by allowing officials to spot suspicious behaviors, it also strips away the student’s privacy at the same time.  Additionally, the implementation of these cameras would cost a lot of money, which could be used in enhancing an educational program or other purposes. 

I can see the security level increase with the new cameras being installed on the school buses; however, I do not believe this is more important than the privacy of the students and the effectiveness of these cameras may not meet expectations.  

The news article 

http://www.news1130.com/2013/10/30/langley-school-district-considers-cameras-on-full-bus-fleet/

Video(1): School Bus camera 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUAKH34V3kimfze8uHuKsqMg&v=LNYWeod8_nA#t=854

Police misconduct

I believe in stiffer penalties because police should use no force at all unless it is to defend themselves from the accused getting violent to escape or to get the accused in control- for example, in handcuffs. It is easy and likely for them to abuse their power so disciplinary action should be installed. 

Lethal force: Recent shootings raise questions over effectiveness of police use-of-force training

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/08/02/lethal-force-recent-shootings-raise-questions-over-effectiveness-of-police-use-of-force-training/

This articles discusses, and provides a general brief overview of many use of force situations, mostly lethal, that Canadian police officers have faced in the past, and will likely continue to face.The author uses many examples of said events, including the well publicized recent deaths of Sammy Yatim, the 18 year old shot to death on a Toronto streetcar in September 2013, and the 2007 shooting death of Paul Boyd, a bipolar man shot 8 times on a downtown Vancouver street. Exploring all the angles of police tactics, such as verbal deescalation vs use of force, it becomes evident that there is no clear cut answer to solving the issue of individuals dying at the hands of the police officers often forced to shoot them.

In recent years, evidence such as eyewitness testimony and especially video or other graphical recordings have come to paint a disturbing picture of lethal force in Canada, often apparently unjustified. From a taser death at Vancouver International to the shooting of a schizophrenic on a Toronto bus in 1997, one could come to the conclusion that rampant and abusive use of firearms, physical force, and compliance devices appears to be on the rise in Canada. Some striking facts mentioned include the moderate sized city of Hamilton having had 4 fatal police shootings in the past 7 years, with Canada on average dealing with a dozen uses of lethal force by law enforcement per year. At first glance, many people could easily decry the firing of 8 shots into a single individual as excessive, just as any amount of shooting at an unarmed or lesser armed individual as brutality. Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant to Canada was tasered 5 times by different officers while unarmed, in a secure area. But unless law enforcement agencies across Canada happen to host large amounts of psychopathic or sadistic individuals, far more than the average per given population, the cause and subsequent fix to police use of force may not be as simple as finger-pointing at deliberate malicious acts by rogue officers.

More likely than malice, factors that play roles in unnecessarily high usage of force often turn out to be things such as inexperience, poor judgement, stress, and poor training. Fight-or-flight reflexes, time dilation, and high levels of adrenaline all impair rational and cool-headed judgement  even in the most highly trained police officers Although police forces may make mistakes that can cost lives, criminal law in Canada distinguishes between acts caused by ill-intent and mistake. While borderline negligent at times, the majority of police officers act in good faith, with the intention of saving lives. In a 2007 article written by criminology expert Professer Rick Parent, he states that it is absolutely conceivable that a police officer be forced to take the time to explore and evaluate every possible option available at any given situation. Instead, an officer is often forced to act with limited knowledge and good faith that acting quickly may help protect individuals.

While independent civilian watchdogs are necessary to objectively evaluate use of force situations and invoke some accountability, no outside evaluation of past events is ever perfect. It's due to these impossibilities in judging every police shooting perfectly, that society (and police investigative forces) often awards a great leeway to police officers involved in lethal action, sometimes to the point of public outrage when a perceived injustice such as excessive use force is not prosecuted. Even if in many cases disciplinary actions may be in order, as Clifton Purvis of the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team stated in regards to the average police officer, "I am almost certain the last thing they planned to do when they went of to work that day was engage in lethal violence." At the end of the day, topics to do with police use of lethal force comprises a wide spectrum of events, policies, training procedures, and deaths. While taking steps towards police transparency and objective investigating of incidents may serve to bring a greater sense of justice and accountability, the issue of police use of lethal force is a complicated one that will likely require much inquiry in the future.

Police Misconduct

Link to article: 

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11140391

This article documents a controversy surrounding a recent event related to police misconduct in the arrest of the Red Devils' Motorcycle Gang, an organized crime group. To arrest the gang, the police officers went to great lengths, even as far as to faking a search warrant and having an undercover police "detained".There was a strong public outcry at the polices'misconduct but the Court of Appeals has unanimously voted to continue on with the trial of the Red Devils. 

The police had been involved in the investigation of the Nelson's Red Devils' Motorcycle Gang for an extended period of time, and even placed an undercover police in the gang as a member. The undercover police is known to the gang as Michael Wiremu Wilson. When Wilson was in danger of having his true identity exposed to the gang, the police allegedly forged the illegible signature of a court deputy registrar on the search warrant, and arrested him. Wilson appeared on several occasions before the judges, who all believed that they were dealing with a genuine case. Soon after the investigation of the Red Devils ended, the police sought to have Wilson's charges erased. However, a judge in the High Court stated that the degree of police misconduct was so high that the trial for the Red Devils should be stopped but the Court of Appeals overturned that decision.

On one hand, the police officers were able to collect evidence to charge the Red Devils' Motorcycle Gang. Even though they had engaged in police misconduct, they were able to protect the rest of the society from more damage caused by the gang. Thus, doesn't the capture of the gang members compensate for the sacrifice of proper conduct?

However, others disagree. Should police officers, the very embodiment of order and justice, be allowed to violate the law in such a way? Even if they were able to capture the gang members, they violated something greater, more important in the process. By belittling police conduct, they are setting a faulty precedent for future generation of policemen.

In my opinion, the police in this article are criminals in their own right by not abiding by polices’ conduct.They are breaching the very vows they had taken when they first began their careers as "protectors of society". As representatives of law, police officers should take great care to model what is "righteous" behavior for the rest of society. By resorting to illegal means to seize criminals, the police officers in this case are throwing away their contracts to law and thus posing as bad examples for the citizens. 

Another Case of Police Brutality, or Just an Accident?

Article: "Cop Throws Woman Into Concrete Bench, Shattering Her Face"
 http://www.heavy.com/news/2013/10/chicago-police-brutality-video-cassandra-feuerstein/

             The case involving Cassandra Feuerstein was very simple in the beginning. She was arrested under the charges of drunk driving, not possessing a valid insurance, parking improperly, and resisting an arrest. The controversy and complication did not arise with this issue itself, but rather when a police officer by the name of Michael Hart pushed Cassandra with such force that shattered her face on the pavement. The devastating result seemed to favour Cassandra entirely, but the issue was not as simple and one-sided as that.

            Officer Hart is a well recognized and respected police officer within his community due to his participation in the Honour Guard program. Members of this program devote a significant amount of time to train and perfect their abilities. A man of such devotion towards his work is not likely to exert an unnecessary amount force against a completely complying citizen. This point is further strengthened by the included video. A moment before the push that injured Cassandra, it is clear to see that she is holding onto the sides of the door, trying her best to avoid being put into the cell. Officer Hart could have simply tried to push her into the cell with absolutely no malicious intent, but due to Cassandra's sudden release of strength (presumably because she was still under alcoholic influences), she was flung across the cell, falling face first.

           Cassandra's lawyer, Torri Hamilton completely disagrees. She suggests that her client was completely compliant during the whole process, and only wished to be able to speak to her children and family in order to resolve their concerns. Any act that resembled a resistance towards the officer could have just been out of her care and concern for her family. Her client has eventually pleaded guilty for the charge of driving under influence, but the resisting the arrest charge was dropped.

           Unlike most cases involving police brutality, this one presents many factors in which the incident could easily be interpreted as an unfortunate accident. Officer Hart has not displayed any action that can be decisively confirmed to have malicious intent. Given his background, it also seems unlikely that he would willingly commit such act of violence to a compliant citizen. The ambiguity of this case that prevents us to prove the mens rea of Officer Hart ultimately renders us unable to conclude his action to be criminal. Although Cassandra's concern for her family is respectable, her actions shown in the video can be seen as a resistance against an officer. Collectively, it seems that this complication that sprung from what seemed to be another case of police brutality, can be concluded to be more of an accident than as a police misconduct. 

Police Conduct Issues- Josh

"Canadian Cop Punches a Cyclist in The Face"[Internet]- Available
http://www.policebrutality.info/2013/04/canadian-cop-punches-a-cyclist-in-the-face.html

Video length: 2minutes 42seconds

The article tells us about a police conduct issue where a police officer punches a cyclist while arresting him, and the article goes like this:

Vancouver police department is investigating the story behind a video of one of their officers hitting a man in the face during the arrest. Andishae Akhavan was riding his bicycle without a helmet through downtown Yaletown when he got stopped by two plainclothes police officers. One of the bystanders started filming the arrest as the cops were trying to handcuff Akhavan. He asked “What is this for?” but didn’t get an answer, not knowing why he was getting arrested. As Akhavan moved his hand in a non threatening way without raising his voice or resisting, he got punched in the face. An officer with a British accent told him that he was punched for resisting arrest.
 Vancouver’s police union president Tom Stamatakis stated that Akhavan drove his bike in a way that “put a lot of people in some risk, whether it’s accident or injury” and “allegedly confrontational with police”. Further investigation is to show whether the use of force was necessary.

My belief on this issue is that no matter how you are riding your bike, a police officer shouldn't be able to arrest a citizen unless there was a legal reason based on the law. Also, He shouldn't be arrested without getting to know the reason why he is being arrested. The police neglected the citizen's Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 8: freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Then, he punched the cyclist in the face while putting a hand cuff on himm which violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  section 7: right to life, liberty, and security of the person. Therefore, as the police doesn't have any legal reason to arrest this cyclist, this is a misconduct of the police power as he used his power as a police to arrest the cyclist just because he can.

This issue ended up by the constable being charged with assault.

Police Conduct Issues

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/16/police-violated-civil-rights-acted-illegally-says-scathing-report-on-g20-summit/

Police violated civil rights, acted illegally, says scathing report on G20 summit

     This article takes an in-depth look on the polices' actions at the 2010 G-20 Toronto summit protests.  According to the article, the Toronto police had "violated civil rights, detained people illegally, and used excessive force."  Evidently, the police officers wanted to stop the protests by any means necessary, even breaching the fundamental and constitutional rights.  The police used their authority to search people without a proper reason or legal justification, and arrested "more than 1,100 people."  Although the majority of the individuals that were arrested were released without charges, this reflects the police violating not only basic rights, but also the police conduct.  Further, many of police officers used force to combat the protesters, giving the people notion that "violence would be met with violence."  Those who were detained were treated terribly, with little food and water, unable to call a lawyer, and "had to use toilets in full view of others".  More importantly, countless were detained illegally.  The latter half of the article explains the lack of organization on the Toronto police and failing to properly disperse the mob.

     This incident is a rather prime example of the police violating their own conduct in order to stop the protesting mob.  Obviously, police officers know the human rights boundaries that they should not cross; however, it is clear that the police were not trained or educated accordingly when dealing with this situation.  As mentioned earlier, human rights were severely violated during the summit protests, which is a direct infringement of the police conducts under the constitution and legislative (Text. 150).  In addition, the fifth principle of the Principles of Canadian Police Services, which is "the importance of respecting victims of crime and understanding their needs" (Text. 151) was violated.  

     Despite the massive scale of the 2010 G-20 Toronto summit protest, it is no excuse for the police of Toronto to be unorganized and neglecting citizens' most basic rights.  I believe that it was simply incorrect for the police to search without warrants, arrest without much reason, and provide a terrible temporary detainment center.  I am convinced that the unorganized and unprepared Toronto Police Service was the reason for this massive violation of human rights.  Thus, I think that better training and instruction on the police will greatly decrease the rate of police misconduct. For the reason that, the police will have various different ways to deal with a situation at his disposal.