Tories want multiple killers to face real life terms

VanIsle

Always thinking
Nov 12, 2008
7,046
43
48
OTTAWA - The federal government plans to bring in legislation to allow judges to impose what are essentially consecutive life sentences for multiple murderers.
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said Wednesday he wants to ensure that serial killers or repeat killers pay an appropriate price.
"Life will mean life," he said.
He said the legislation means an end to what he calls volume discounts for multiple murderers.
Normally, a conviction for first-degree murder carries sentence of life in prison with no parole eligibility for 25 years.
Those convicted of more than one killing still face only the single 25-year period of ineligibility for parole.
The new legislation would allow - but not require - judges to impose consecutive terms of parole ineligibility, meaning a killer might have to serve 50, even 75 years without chance of parole.
But the legislation will leave this sentence to the judges.
"It's the judge that will make the decision. ... He or she will be required to consider this," the minister told a news conference.
"We're giving the judges discretion to see if the case is an appropriate one for an individual to receive consecutive parole ineligibility if they've been convicted or more than one murder."
He suggested that leaving it discretionary, rather than mandatory, will make it proof against Charter of Rights challenges.
"Sometimes when we introduce legislation, we have to be very careful about charter challenges and to make sure it complies and again, when we had a look at the whole issue, we believed this was a reasonable response to this question and again, it will be up to the judges."
This is the latest in a series of tough-on-crime measures brought in by the Tories this fall, including tougher sentences for white-collar crime and an end to two-for-one credit for pre-trial jail time.
 

VanIsle

Always thinking
Nov 12, 2008
7,046
43
48
The new legislation would allow but not require judges to impose consecutive terms of parole ineligibility.
I wonder if the judges will impose the new terms at all when they come in effect. I don't like that judges have discretion. IMO that is one of the biggest problems we have with the justice system now.
 

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
Makes sense to me, as long at the judges use these abilities.

In my opinion, if you are convicted of first degree murder, that should be it. No need to sentence consecutive "life in prison" terms seeing as they shouldn't walk away from the first conviction.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
I am not a conservative politically, but I give them full marks on this one.
Its about time these killers paid dearly for what they've done. Warehouse
them for life, and not even let them be paroled ever.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Makes sense to me, as long at the judges use these abilities.

In my opinion, if you are convicted of first degree murder, that should be it. No need to sentence consecutive "life in prison" terms seeing as they shouldn't walk away from the first conviction.
Ir will be inter sting to see the reaction from Blowing in the wind, Iggy -
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Sounds fine to me. I liked the southern version, too; 3 strikes you're OUTTA HERE! (I like baseball :) )
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
That is an expensive proposition. Prisoners should be made to earn their keep. Why do we have to provide free room and board for criminals? Make them build their own prisons and grow their own food, make their own clothes.

What a stupid and expensive legal system we have. We don't have enough prisons, guards or police as it is. How are we going to enforce more laws and longer sentences. I like the Chinese version - a bullet to the back of the head outside the court room. Political correctness and bleeding hearts be damned. I vote Colpy for Grand High Exaltant Executioner.
(Oooops! I got carried away in the heat of the moment.)
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
It is about time that when a court orders you to spend life in jail that is exactly what they mean. You don't like the death penalty for what ever reason, Life in Prison for serious crimes is very appropriate punishment. There is very little chance of reform in prisons, so why release someone in 25 years to go and kill again, that only make the justice system a co-murderer.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
The new legislation would allow but not require judges to impose consecutive terms of parole ineligibility.
I wonder if the judges will impose the new terms at all when they come in effect. I don't like that judges have discretion. IMO that is one of the biggest problems we have with the justice system now.

I strongly disagree.

I am a Conservative, but I believe judges require discretion for justice to be done.

I think the legislation is well considered, in that it allows, but does not require, the judge to impose parole ineligibility.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
I strongly disagree.

I am a Conservative, but I believe judges require discretion for justice to be done.

I think the legislation is well considered, in that it allows, but does not require, the judge to impose parole ineligibility.

Exactly; the whole point of the justice system is to allow the accused to make his/her case for any extenuating circumstances etc, and in theory the learned judge will take that into consideration, if it's credible.