First teen sentenced in Kenneth Lee case gets 15 months probation

[uchual]

That's right. Taking the life of a man gives you 15 months PROBATION in Canada. She and her sc*mbag friends should have been tried as adults. Only in Canada.

First teen sentenced in Kenneth Lee case gets probation | CP24.com

 

[Sugarsweet905]

That's right. Taking the life of a man gives you 15 months PROBATION in Canada. She and her sc*mbag friends should have been tried as adults. Only in Canada.

First teen sentenced in Kenneth Lee case gets probation | CP24.com

Not totally surprised. Manslaughter is how to get away with murder in Canada.

 

[Ponderling]

I'm of two minds on this.

They may be a pile of bad seeds.
But just maybe a chance in this justice system exposure will turn some of them around.

On the other hand fool me once...
Next time they are before judge on the next matter some will find themslves entangled in going forward: Let the book of justice fall on them extra hard.

 

[Nathan 88]

15 months in jail and 15 months probation.
Thats fairly normal for a minor who commits a crime like that.

 

[Anbarandy]

Didn't know that Thug Fraud was on this site.

 

[Ceiling Cat]

The individuals in question often have lower levels of education and a strong sense of entitlement to government benefits. Many express frustration and struggle to relate to people from different backgrounds. Despite having access to opportunities that are not available to the average Canadian, such as free tuition at many universities if they meet basic standards, they often remain resistant to integrating into mainstream society. This ingrained mindset can create barriers to their personal growth and societal inclusion.

Their opportunities are readily available and cost-free, yet many young people who engage in criminal activities are likely to continue down this path. Consequently, their futures may lead to prison, addiction to drugs or alcohol, violence, overdose, or one day return to a quieter rural lifestyle.

 

[onomatopoeia]

We don't know the extent to which this person was involved, so it's entirely possible that what was imposed by the Sentencing Judge's is appropriate. One would expect that those least involved and most willing to co-operate would go to trial first. It's also probable that part of the deal will involve testifying for the Crown against other defendants.

 

[RZG]

We don't know the extent to which this person was involved, so it's entirely possible that what was imposed by the Sentencing Judge's is appropriate. One would expect that those least involved and most willing to co-operate would go to trial first. It's also probable that part of the deal will involve testifying for the Crown against other defendants.

Kinda` like excusing Charlie Manson because he didn`t pull the trigger or do any stabbing or beating. He and all the Manson wacked out assholes deserved a bullet in the head, just like every one of these evil little bitches. Canada, soft on crime.

 

[onomatopoeia]

Kinda` like excusing Charlie Manson because he didn`t pull the trigger or do any stabbing or beating. He and all the Manson wacked out assholes deserved a bullet in the head, just like every one of these evil little bitches. Canada, soft on crime.

We know that this first individual sentenced had some involvement in the crime. Details about the extent of that involvement have not been released. Therefore it is possible that the sentence is Just, and possible that the sentence is overly lenient. If this individual had minimal involvement in the death, (for example, if they held one of the victim's arms, to prevent self-defense), and if this same individual's future testimony may be crucial in obtaining convictions of the 'more guilty' perpetrators, a deal like this would be 'business as usual' for a felony-homicide trial which involves multiple accuseds.

 

[SmokinAces]

We know that this first individual sentenced had some involvement in the crime. Details about the extent of that involvement have not been released. Therefore it is possible that the sentence is Just, and possible that the sentence is overly lenient. If this individual had minimal involvement in the death, (for example, if they held one of the victim's arms, to prevent self-defense), and if this same individual's future testimony may be crucial in obtaining convictions of the 'more guilty' perpetrators, a deal like this would be 'business as usual' for a felony-homicide trial which involves multiple accuseds.

You maybe correct but there are a lot of if's there... Time will tell if what you say is true and maybe you are right.

My thoughts are even at 13 years old... she knew what was happening was wrong. Even if it did not lead to Mr Lee's death what those girls did was wrong. Whatever her involvement is... this still seems like a soft punishment.

 

[onomatopoeia]

You maybe correct but there are a lot of if's there... Time will tell if what you say is true and maybe you are right.

My thoughts are even at 13 years old... she knew what was happening was wrong. Even if it did not lead to Mr Lee's death what those girls did was wrong. Whatever her involvement is... this still seems like a soft punishment.

None of us know what she did, so I see no point in speculating about whether or not the sentence was fair. None of us should, and it's not our decision to make. I just proposed a scenario which is consistent with the known facts, and past legal precedents. Canadian and American trial and sentencing Judges are very different, largely because in Canada, they are appointed and in the USA, they are elected. We don't have any redneck Judges who sentence particularly heinous criminals to sentences of thousands of years, to be served consecutively.

My personal opinion is that sentencing in Canada is often overly lenient, but I only express opinions on actual sentences when I know all of the pertinent facts. There isn't enough information in a CP24 news brief, in a case with a publication ban on trial evidence, for ANYONE to express an informed opinion. It is standard procedure, however, to offer a more lenient penalty to an accused who has agreed to a guilty plea, as opposed to one who 'rolls the dice' on acquittal or conviction.

 

[SmokinAces]

None of us know what she did, so I see no point in speculating about whether or not the sentence was fair. None of us should, and it's not our decision to make. I just proposed a scenario which is consistent with the known facts, and past legal precedents. Canadian and American trial and sentencing Judges are very different, largely because in Canada, they are appointed and in the USA, they are elected. We don't have any redneck Judges who sentence particularly heinous criminals to sentences of thousands of years, to be served consecutively.

My personal opinion is that sentencing in Canada is often overly lenient, but I only express opinions on actual sentences when I know all of the pertinent facts. There isn't enough information in a CP24 news brief, in a case with a publication ban on trial evidence, for ANYONE to express an informed opinion. It is standard procedure, however, to offer a more lenient penalty to an accused who has agreed to a guilty plea, as opposed to one who 'rolls the dice' on acquittal or conviction.

Wow!!! You need to look in the mirror. You are speculating... so shouldn't you take your own advice?

Why bring up the USA? Are you trying to highjack the thread to be off topic? Fact Check: In the US Judges are not elected in every jurisdiction. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/judicial-selection-united-states-special-report At least know what you are talking about instead of speculating or ignorantly posting misinformation.

 

[rocco_s]

These people are a public hazard. Either relegate them to a sanctuary or put them out of their misery and save taxpayer money. Where is the Justice for the family?

 

[Anbarandy]

We know that this first individual sentenced had some involvement in the crime. Details about the extent of that involvement have not been released. Therefore it is possible that the sentence is Just, and possible that the sentence is overly lenient. If this individual had minimal involvement in the death, (for example, if they held one of the victim's arms, to prevent self-defense), and if this same individual's future testimony may be crucial in obtaining convictions of the 'more guilty' perpetrators, a deal like this would be 'business as usual' for a felony-homicide trial which involves multiple accuseds.

Quite a bit of details aka evidence of her involvement is available throughout the attack via video. Also, video off TTC "attacks" perpetrated by "the gang" with the teen in question being an avid participator.

That said, there are many, many factors that the judge must consider when sentencing.

Also, there are no felony charges in Canada.

 

[Anbarandy]

These people are a public hazard. Either relegate them to a sanctuary or put them out of their misery and save taxpayer money. Where is the Justice for the family?

Thug Fraud, is that you?

 

[Anbarandy]

None of us know what she did, so I see no point in speculating about whether or not the sentence was fair. None of us should, and it's not our decision to make. I just proposed a scenario which is consistent with the known facts, and past legal precedents. Canadian and American trial and sentencing Judges are very different, largely because in Canada, they are appointed and in the USA, they are elected. We don't have any redneck Judges who sentence particularly heinous criminals to sentences of thousands of years, to be served consecutively.

My personal opinion is that sentencing in Canada is often overly lenient, but I only express opinions on actual sentences when I know all of the pertinent facts. There isn't enough information in a CP24 news brief, in a case with a publication ban on trial evidence, for ANYONE to express an informed opinion. It is standard procedure, however, to offer a more lenient penalty to an accused who has agreed to a guilty plea, as opposed to one who 'rolls the dice' on acquittal or conviction.

Again, there is evidence of exactly what she did! Video evidence.

 

[onomatopoeia]

Again, there is evidence of exactly what she did! Video evidence.

There are several accused. How can anyone who was not present in the Court room know which of the accused was the first to be sentenced?

 

[Anbarandy]

There are several accused. How can anyone who was not present in the Court room know which of the accused was the first to be sentenced?

Read the following which details her physical actions. There were cameras everywhere.

First girl sentenced in swarming death avoids more jail time (thestar.com)

 

[Anbarandy]

Based on the fact she was illegally strip searched in custody I suspect she will be suing for damages ala Omar Khadr. I bet Trudeau can't wait to cut her a million dollar cheque.

Why would your prime minister cut her a cheque?

It is after all, your Thug Fraud's provincial courts/corrections system that perpetrated these illegal searches that has you so manic and agog with indignation.

Based upon the fact that you really are out to lunch on this topic, cut yourself a bum cheque and exit stage left.

 

[Butler1000]

Once again, who gives a shit about some homeless man when those poor misguided girls need all the love and attention we can muster?

I believe in a rehabilitation system but this is a slap in the face to anything resembling justice. My take away is kids will read this and say they can do this time no problem. As will street gang groomers who use kids under similar circumstances.

And my personal take away is should any feral teens do this again and get killed for it they had it coming.