Does the Punishment fit the Crime?

[canuck50]

Okay, I'm sorry for all the victims of residential school abuses... But this is really getting stupid..... Please read news article before commenting.....


Blaine Taypotat, man who killed Sask. conservation officer, appealing sentence

Blaine Taypotat received 9.5 year sentence after hitting and killing 23-year-old officer

CBC News Posted: Dec 04, 2015 11:29 AM CT Last Updated: Dec 04, 2015 11:29 AM CT

Blaine Taypotat (left) being escorted out of court in June 2015. (David Shield/CBC)





Related Stories

• Blaine Taypotat gets 9.5 years in death of conservation officer
• Conservation officers pay tribute to Justin Knackstedt

A man who pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the death of a conservation officer is appealing his sentence.
Blaine Taypotat was given a nine-and-half year sentence after pleading guilty to manslaughter, as well as impaired driving and criminal negligence causing death.
Taypotat hit 23-year-old Justin Knackstedt with his vehicle in 2013. Knackstedt was out of his vehicle, directing drivers around another traffic collision, south of Saskatoon on Highway 11.
Taypotat's blood alcohol level was three times over the legal limit, and he was under a judicial order not to drive or drink at the time. He was driving approximately 100 km/h.
Defence lawyers entered a Gladue report, stating that Taypotat had been a victim of the residential school system, and had suffered years of abuse and neglect.
The appeal is scheduled for Dec. 10 at the Court of Appeal in Regina.


SASKATOON - A man who was sent to prison after he pleaded guilty in the death of a Saskatchewan conservation officer is appealing his sentence.
Blaine Taypotat was sentenced last June to 9 1/2 years for manslaughter and impaired driving causing death.
Court heard that Taypotat was drunk and speeding when he struck and killed Justin Knackstedt on Highway 11 between Regina and Saskatoon in May 2013.
Knackstedt had stopped to help police direct traffic at a crash scene.
The sentencing judge said it was true that Taypotat showed remorse, but he had a blood-alcohol level three times the legal limit and fled after he hit Knackstedt.
Taypotat’s appeal is scheduled for next Thursday at the Court of Appeal in Regina.
Officers at the scene said Taypotat was driving about 100 kilometres an hour when he hit Knackstedt. The force propelled the 23-year-old conservation officer 40 metres into the ditch.
Witnesses described seeing a black SUV speeding, swerving in and out of the ditch and weaving through traffic before arriving at a roadblock set up at the crash.
Police on the scene were notified about a possible drunk driver and attempted to stop Taypotat. A female officer testified he initially pulled over to the side of the road before he "gunned it'' and sped away.
She radioed other officers up ahead, but the information did not get to Knackstedt and his partner in time.
Taypotat already had an extensive criminal record, which included previous drunk-driving convictions and a driving prohibition. There were also outstanding warrants against him on other drunk-driving charges.
(CTV Saskatoon, The Canadian Press)




Now I'm sorry... REALLY?????????????????? Does that mean because I was abused as a child I can go out and kill someone and not be held criminally responsible? This is really getting tiresome. Maybe its just me... But damn it people.... GROW BALLS and accept the fact that YOU SCREWED UP. It wasn't the residential school that poured the liquor down your throat, put you behind the wheel and killed the victim. MAN UP and accept whats coming to you. You're damned lucky to be only given a 9 1/2 yr sentence. Maybe I should go get pissed, pull out a gun and off someone. I was drunk I didn't know what I was doing. BULL****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lets get real people.


After all, He was wanted on other offences such as, Driving while disqualified, Impaired driving and had outstanding warrants for impaired driving also. Hmmmmmmmmm I seem to see a bit of a pattern here. Apparently, the LAW does not apply to him because he was a victim of the "Residential Schools". Well I don't know if this is just me... but why the hell are we catering to this crap? A woman got killed in Kelowna BC after being ran over by a "residential school" victim because he was driving while prohibited. Only to have the driver cleared because he was a residential school victim. How many more people have to suffer and families have to lose their loved ones because of the bleeding hearts that are under the impression that "ITS NOT MY FAULT BECAUSE.... Insert your own reason here...." My patience are running very thin with our "JUSTICE SYSTEM". I'm thinking its time these judges are all removed from the bench and that we start to elect the judges and make THEM accountable.

 

[Machjo]

They were probably taking PTSD into account. A Canadian soldier tried to use the same argument in the murder of his wife recently too. I did not attend the trial so don't know all of the details so won't vote in the poll.

 

[AnnaG]

From what is posted, I would consider the judgement lenient. If Taypotat was subjected to a residential school, it has no relevancy to whether he knows right from wrong. I suspect that after an apparent habit of lawbreaking, he does know the difference and simply does not care.
If Taypotat has PTSD, his lawyers would have sprung that in court and not waited till after sentencing. But they had requested a Gladue report. Personally, I think the crime is too serious for Gladue.

 

[MHz]

It might have a bearing on what sentence he receives in a mental facility compared to lockup in the general prison population rather than not going to one or the other.

 

[Ludlow]

Bailiff,,,whack his peepee

 

[Corduroy]

My patience are running very thin with our "JUSTICE SYSTEM". I'm thinking its time these judges are all removed from the bench and that we start to elect the judges and make THEM accountable.

Not a fan of the right to appeal? It's not the judges who are responsible for that.

 

[Machjo]

Not a fan of the right to appeal? It's not the judges who are responsible for that.

True enough. Add to that that it's not always the accused who appeals but the accuser. Sometimes when a judge rules in favour of the accused, the Crown will appeal the judgement.

One problem I do have with the Crown appealing though is that it can sometimes be wielded as a weapon in a personal vendetta.

As an example, the CBSA arrest someone on no evidence but guilt by association and racial profiling. The person fights back and predictably wins.

The CBSA resents the challenge to its authority so decides to appeal as a harassment tool. After all, the CBSA agent win't have to pay out of pocket since the taxpayer pays for his side, but the accused now acquitted has to repeat the process all over again.

It doesn't matter that the CBSA has no case and will lose again; it's about wielding the appeal process as a weapon of harassment in its own right, the appeal itself being the intended punishment.

 

[Jinentonix]

True enough. Add to that that it's not always the accused who appeals but the accuser. Sometimes when a judge rules in favour of the accused, the Crown will appeal the judgement.

One problem I do have with the Crown appealing though is that it can sometimes be wielded as a weapon in a personal vendetta.

As an example, the CBSA arrest someone on no evidence but guilt by association and racial profiling. The person fights back and predictably wins.

The CBSA resents the challenge to its authority so decides to appeal as a harassment tool. After all, the CBSA agent win't have to pay out of pocket since the taxpayer pays for his side, but the accused now acquitted has to repeat the process all over again.

It doesn't matter that the CBSA has no case and will lose again; it's about wielding the appeal process as a weapon of harassment in its own right, the appeal itself being the intended punishment.

Well, when foreigners who are convicted felons can abuse the appeal process to fight deportation...

Not a fan of the right to appeal? It's not the judges who are responsible for that.

No, but they ARE in part responsible for the special sentencing guidelines specifically for Natives. Like it or not we have a three tiered justice system here. One for the wealthy and politicians, one for the Natives and one for everyone else. Although we're quickly adding another tier, one for "special interest groups" ie; ethnic and religious minorities.
Ontario is the only place I can think of in the civilized world where having a dissenting opinion about Islam in public is a crime while being assaulted for said opinion is perfectly acceptable and apparently, legal.

 

[Cliffy]

Well, when foreigners who are convicted felons can abuse the appeal process to fight deportation...

No, but they ARE in part responsible for the special sentencing guidelines specifically for Natives. Like it or not we have a three tiered justice system here. One for the wealthy and politicians, one for the Natives and one for everyone else. Although we're quickly adding another tier, one for "special interest groups" ie; ethnic and religious minorities.
Ontario is the only place I can think of in the civilized world where having a dissenting opinion about Islam in public is a crime while being assaulted for said opinion is perfectly acceptable and apparently, legal.

That also applies to dissenting opinions about Zionists as the recent Arthur Topham case has proved.

 

[Machjo]

Well, when foreigners who are convicted felons can abuse the appeal process to fight deportation...

What do victims of guilt by association and racial profiling who win a judgement in their favour on at the first hearing have to do with convicted felons? Do you really want to waste taxpayer money harassing someone through an appeal because a CBSA officer has a personal vendetta against him even though the CBSA doesn't stand a chance of winning?

 

[canuck50]

True enough. Add to that that it's not always the accused who appeals but the accuser. Sometimes when a judge rules in favour of the accused, the Crown will appeal the judgement.

One problem I do have with the Crown appealing though is that it can sometimes be wielded as a weapon in a personal vendetta.

As an example, the CBSA arrest someone on no evidence but guilt by association and racial profiling. The person fights back and predictably wins.

The CBSA resents the challenge to its authority so decides to appeal as a harassment tool. After all, the CBSA agent win't have to pay out of pocket since the taxpayer pays for his side, but the accused now acquitted has to repeat the process all over again.

It doesn't matter that the CBSA has no case and will lose again; it's about wielding the appeal process as a weapon of harassment in its own right, the appeal itself being the intended punishment.

In response.... They way I see it.... WE as taxpayers need to do something to make sure that the CBSA agent is responsible for the legal fees as it is obviously a PERSONAL VENDETTA. The CBSA should fire the individual. Oh right. the union won't allow that Then make the UNION pay for the legal bills and put the debt on all CBSA agents. How popular will this clown be when his/her co workers realize they are forced to pay legal fees for this clown? Just a thought.

 

[Dixie Cup]

ummm - how old is this dude? Did he actually attend residential schools or was it his parents? Just askin....

 

[Danbones]

has canada honored all its treaties with natives yet?
non?
business as usual

on the other hand, natives:
be glad you aren't palistinians or syrians

as far as was the person a vic or decendant..
holocaust children who were born after the war are trying to claim victimhood money...
so should everyone else do the same too

 

[Twila]

PTSD could be why he's an alcoholic. But it doesn't explain, excuse or other wise account for driving drunk.

9.5 years is a long time for a drunk driver fatality. Most sentences are not that long.

as far as was the person a vic or decendant..
holocaust children who were born after the war are trying to claim victimhood money...
so should everyone else do the same too

Not to defend the victimhood claim on money at all.

But those children of holocaust victims will have suffered from what their parents experienced.

ALL these links talk about how trauma is stored in the DNA of humans and how it is passed onto the offspring

Study of Holocaust survivors finds trauma passed on to children's genes | Science | The Guardian

'Memories' pass between generations - BBC News

Scientists have found that memories may be passed down through generations in our DNA - ScienceGymnasium

Phobias may be memories passed down in genes from ancestors - Telegraph

Scientists have found that memories may be passed down through generations in our DNA | The Mind Unleashed

Grandma's Experiences Leave Epigenetic Mark on Your Genes | DiscoverMagazine.com

 

[Ludlow]

That ptsd thing sure gets used a lot. The psychologists and the pharmacy companies are sure making the cash on that one.

 

[Ron in Regina]

R v. Gladue states specifically that the principle is “not to be taken as a means of automatically reducing the prison sentence of aboriginal offenders.” The decision also says that it’s “unreasonable to assume that aboriginal peoples do not believe in the importance of traditional sentencing goals.”

Nevertheless, lighter sentences and more ready bail are often the effect — to the point where the Gladue process has been criticized by Indigenous women’s groups for favouring Indigenous male offenders at the expense of Indigenous female victims.

“The victims deserve to have someone advocating for them in court just as much as the perpetrator,” Dawn Lavell-Harvard, president of the Native Women’s Association of Canada, told National Post in 2016.

Prince Rupert, B.C., pastor, Nathan Legault, who was convicted of several charges related to the sexual victimization of young girls under his supervision, including a conviction for the making of child pornography.

But before the sentencing, Legault told the court he now self-identified as Métis, and should thus be subject to Gladue Rights — a system wherein judges are required to consider lighter and “alternate” sentences for Indigenous offenders.

First written into the Criminal Code in 1995 and then encoded in the 1999 Supreme Court decision R v. Gladue, these principles were explicitly introduced to reduce rates of Indigenous incarceration by requiring judges to consider “the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders” before applying a legal sanction.

A B.C. judge has warned that a “tsunami” of fake Indigenous people are set to hit the Canadian court system as offenders increasingly claim Indigenous status in a bid to obtain lighter treatment.

“A Tsunami is coming; driven by the desire of non-Indigenous people to get what they perceive to be the benefits of identifying as Indigenous,” B.C. Provincial Court Judge David Patterson said in a decision published this week.

FIRST READING: Judge warns of 'tsunami' of offenders faking Indigenous status to get lighter sentences — National Post

Under Gladue principles, offenders claiming Indigenous status can obtain alternative sentences, reduced jail time and easier bail

apple.news

Legault would end up getting off with a sentence that was so lenient that Patterson wrote that he was “uncomfortable” with it, and adopted the proposal “reluctantly.”

Legault faces no jail time. For two years he must be home by 5 p.m. on weekdays, and is confined to house arrest on weekends, in addition to other restrictions.

Nevertheless, it wasn’t because Legault claimed to be Métis. As the decision wrote, “his self-identification as Indigenous … (does) not lessen his moral blameworthiness.”

Instead, Patterson wrote that Legault’s light sentence was due to another limiting aspect of Canadian sentencing law.

The Crown and defence presented the court with a “joint submission on sentence” after Legault pleaded guilty to two charges in exchange for the Crown dropping three others.

In order to toughen the light sentence that was suggested by prosecutors, the judge would have needed to prove that its application would throw “the administration of justice into disrepute or otherwise be contrary to the public interest.”

Since that wasn’t “a certainty,” Patterson wrote, “I am resisting the urge to re-engineer the joint submission and I reluctantly endorse the joint submission.”

 

[Taxslave2]

R v. Gladue states specifically that the principle is “not to be taken as a means of automatically reducing the prison sentence of aboriginal offenders.” The decision also says that it’s “unreasonable to assume that aboriginal peoples do not believe in the importance of traditional sentencing goals.”

Nevertheless, lighter sentences and more ready bail are often the effect — to the point where the Gladue process has been criticized by Indigenous women’s groups for favouring Indigenous male offenders at the expense of Indigenous female victims.

“The victims deserve to have someone advocating for them in court just as much as the perpetrator,” Dawn Lavell-Harvard, president of the Native Women’s Association of Canada, told National Post in 2016.

Prince Rupert, B.C., pastor, Nathan Legault, who was convicted of several charges related to the sexual victimization of young girls under his supervision, including a conviction for the making of child pornography.

But before the sentencing, Legault told the court he now self-identified as Métis, and should thus be subject to Gladue Rights — a system wherein judges are required to consider lighter and “alternate” sentences for Indigenous offenders.

First written into the Criminal Code in 1995 and then encoded in the 1999 Supreme Court decision R v. Gladue, these principles were explicitly introduced to reduce rates of Indigenous incarceration by requiring judges to consider “the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders” before applying a legal sanction.

A B.C. judge has warned that a “tsunami” of fake Indigenous people are set to hit the Canadian court system as offenders increasingly claim Indigenous status in a bid to obtain lighter treatment.

“A Tsunami is coming; driven by the desire of non-Indigenous people to get what they perceive to be the benefits of identifying as Indigenous,” B.C. Provincial Court Judge David Patterson said in a decision published this week.
View attachment 21467

FIRST READING: Judge warns of 'tsunami' of offenders faking Indigenous status to get lighter sentences — National Post

Under Gladue principles, offenders claiming Indigenous status can obtain alternative sentences, reduced jail time and easier bail

apple.news

Legault would end up getting off with a sentence that was so lenient that Patterson wrote that he was “uncomfortable” with it, and adopted the proposal “reluctantly.”

Legault faces no jail time. For two years he must be home by 5 p.m. on weekdays, and is confined to house arrest on weekends, in addition to other restrictions.

Nevertheless, it wasn’t because Legault claimed to be Métis. As the decision wrote, “his self-identification as Indigenous … (does) not lessen his moral blameworthiness.”

Instead, Patterson wrote that Legault’s light sentence was due to another limiting aspect of Canadian sentencing law.

The Crown and defence presented the court with a “joint submission on sentence” after Legault pleaded guilty to two charges in exchange for the Crown dropping three others.

In order to toughen the light sentence that was suggested by prosecutors, the judge would have needed to prove that its application would throw “the administration of justice into disrepute or otherwise be contrary to the public interest.”

Since that wasn’t “a certainty,” Patterson wrote, “I am resisting the urge to re-engineer the joint submission and I reluctantly endorse the joint submission.”

I was reading about that in the paper this morning. No one wants to be an Indian until there is a personal benefit from it.