So how many of you are for longer jail sentences......
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
Wow! And you are call ME narrow minded. With your "it sucks but we can't do any better" attitude? You are calling me a downer when you belive nothing better is possible? lol... there are a million ways I could suggest the system is improved, but the fact is too many people have a vested interest and derive good incomes from the current scam. It will not change until a crisis forces it to change.
nobody forsed your buddy to accept the deal by the way
he could have fought his crim case and if successful, proceed to civil case
Duh!! do you actually consider this insightful? The fact is, if you have a criminal record in Canada you are FUCKED!! FUCKED UP THE ASS WITH NO LUBE to be exact. In fact it would be worthwhile to pay 500K to avoid one.. you would probably still come out ahead. Plust the state can continue to burn through your cash in all kinds of BS trial motions. Trust me...avoid ALL CONTACT with police. Never, never get involved and think carefully about providing any information or interacting with them in any way. I will post a follow up to this effect.
what the hell are you talking about? if you are a banker, then yes, record is not helpful
if you are a small business owner, you likely don't really give a fuck unless it's a "crime of moral turpitude" for US border crossing purposes or you are an immigrant who is not a citizen yet.
whole lot of people live with records and couldn't care less
and for 500K a pop I'd agree to get 20 records
At least I offered an alternative while you continued to inanely dance away....
I don't know what lawyers you people use
here is an excerpt from an Ontario case R. v. Falzette, [1999] O.J. No. 5465 that hopefully will help you understand the abuse of process concept:
...Ever since the doctrine of "abuse of process" was first officially recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Jewitt (1985) 21 C.C.C. (3d) 7, that Court has consistently formulated the general test for "abuse of process" in the same way. The Court has repeatedly affirmed that the trial Courts process a "residual discretion" to stay criminal proceedings where compelling an accused to stand trial would "violate those fundamental principles of justice which underlie the community's sense of fair play and decency" or be an abuse of the Court's process because the proceedings would be oppressive or vexatious.
4 The resort to criminal proceedings not for the purpose of punishing or deterring the wrong doer, but rather to enforce a civil debt or realize on some civil claim is one of the earliest recognized applications of abuse and examples include R. v. Janvier [1985] 5 W.W.R. 59 (Sask QB), R. v. Lerourx: (1928) 50 C.C.C. 52 (Ont CA), R. v. Leclair (1956) 115 C.C.C. 297 (Ont CA), R. v. Inuvik Coastal Railways [1984] N.W.T.R. 15 and Re State of Nebraska and Morris (1970) 2 C.C.C. (2d) 282 (Western Case).....
what the hell are you talking about? if you are a banker, then yes, record is not helpful
if you are a small business owner, you likely don't really give a fuck unless it's a "crime of moral turpitude" for US border crossing purposes or you are an immigrant who is not a citizen yet.
whole lot of people live with records and couldn't care less
and for 500K a pop I'd agree to get 20 records
Assault is moral terpitude. Many, many crimes are considered moral terpitude...
no it's not unless it's Assault with intent to kill, commit rape, commit robbery or commit serious bodily harm
or Assault with a dangerous or deadly weapon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_turpitude
Your ignorance of history certainly doesn't stop you from voicing an opinion even if you must make up your facts. History is filled with governments that had worse public displays of their crimes from public stocks used in the colonies for adulterers, witches, theft to public stoning still active in the middle east. Dance any little argument you want - your premise in the above statement is blatantly false.
Yes, I admit the sarcasm to prove a point can be lost on those who cannot connect a few dots to follow the reasoning. There is no reason that someone whose is incarcerated should not have to earn their food and lodging the same way every individual outside the prison does. How does suspending the entire concept of earning an honest living and replacing it with free accommodations prepare an inmate to return back into society ? Why should honest people working for a living have to support criminals ?
Fuck this idiotic concept of paying ~$150K to have some asshole sit on his ass in jail. At that rate, they should pay me $100K to sit outside the jail without working and save money. Make them work for their lodging. If they want training to get a job, lend them the money (credits on lodging) the same way students do on the outside of the prison. If they don't want to work - put them in a zoo environment and charge admission. It's their choice but they must earn their lodging.
With reference to the minor offence that some one suggested would lead to public humiliation - again it is their choice. They are in jail - they can sort papers, work in the kitchen but they don't sit on their ass watching TV waiting for lunch. You can call me Stalin if I ran the jails but I'd guarrantee you that you wouldn't be spending $150K per person to keep them there.
Repeat offenses - after leaving my prison the concept of working for a living won't be a surprise to them. I'm guessing the concept of sitting on your ass instead of working leads to getting easy money through crime.
what his lawyer should have done at that point was to advise the Crown that he cannot act for client anymore as he, lawyer, became a witness, and further that he will pass this file to another lawyer and that application to stay the charges due to abuse of process is likely to be brought by the new lawyer in due course.
yes simple assault is not considered a moral turpitude crime, but just try and cross saying you are being charged with assault... GOOD LUCK!!! The meatheads will turn you around immediately and then head to the bathroom to masturbate.
Category Crimes involving moral turpitude
Fraud:
* Making false representation
* Knowledge of such false representation by the perpetrator
* Reliance on the false representation by the person defrauded
* An intent to defraud
* The actual act of committing fraud
Evil intent:
* Arson
* Blackmail
* Burglary
* Embezzlement
* Extortion
* False pretenses
* Forgery
* Fraud
* Larceny (grand or petty)
* Malicious destruction of property
* Receiving stolen goods (with guilty knowledge)
* Robbery
* Theft (when it involves the intention of permanent taking)
* Transporting stolen property (with guilty knowledge)
* Bribery
* Counterfeiting
* Fraud against revenue or other government functions
* Mail fraud
* Perjury
* Harboring a fugitive from justice (with guilty knowledge)
* Tax evasion (willful)
* Abandonment of a minor child (if willful and resulting in the destitution of the child)
* Adultery (see INA 101** repealed by Public Law 97-116)
* Assault (this crime is broken down into several categories, which involve moral turpitude):
o Assault with intent to kill, commit rape, commit robbery or commit serious bodily harm
o Assault with a dangerous or deadly weapon
* Bigamy
* Contributing to the delinquency of a minor
* Gross indecency
* Incest (if the result of an improper sexual relationship)
* Kidnapping
* Lewdness
* Manslaughter:
o Voluntary
o Involuntary (where the statute requires proof of recklessness, which is defined as the awareness and conscious disregard of a substantial and unjustified risk which constitutes a gross deviation from the standard that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. A conviction for the statutory offense of vehicular homicide or other involuntary manslaughter only requires a showing of negligence will not involve moral turpitude even if it appears the defendant in fact acted recklessly)
* Mayhem
* Murder
* Pandering
* Prostitution
* Rape (including "Statutory rape" by virtue of the victim's age)
# An attempt to commit a crime deemed to involve moral turpitude
# Aiding and abetting in the commission of a crime deemed to involve moral turpitude
# Being an accessory (before or after the fact) in the commission of a crime deemed to involve moral turpitude
# Taking part in a conspiracy (or attempting to take part in a conspiracy) to commit a crime involving moral turpitude where the attempted crime would not itself constitute mo
do you have reading comprehension issues? Assault (simple) (i.e., any assault, which does not require an evil intent or depraved motive, although it may involve the use of a weapon, which is neither dangerous nor deadly) is specifically noted as NOT a crime of moral turpitude.
I edited mhy post... please see above. Plus you need a visa if you have any convictions...
tons of people cross every day
it's not guaranteed but in all likelihood you will be let through
