Life on death row, kind of a cake walk.

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
I don't know what it is about the charter that some claim is 'f***ed up'.

The usual claim is that it somehow it gives more rights to criminals. It doesn't give more rights to criminals than it does to victims, it guarantees everyone has basic rights. What's wrong with that?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
And just where does it say in the Charter that felons must be housed in resorts (even assuming what you say is true, which I don’t for a minute)?

All Charter says is that criminals cannot be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. That rules out things like torture, death penalty etc. Where does it say that they must be housed in resorts?

My point exactly- if the Charter was any kind of decent document it would state unequivocally that felons aren't permitted to be housed in resort like facilities.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
My point exactly- if the Charter was any kind of decent document it would state unequivocally that felons aren't permitted to be housed in resort like facilities.

The Charter is a charter of rights, not a charter of rights-to-be-withheld on a whim.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
I think it's an "interpretation" of point no. 12, under Legal Rights in the Charter:

"Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment."

"cruel and unusual treatment" is a matter of opinion, or many different opinions, I'm sure...

Has there been a Charter case about this? I seriously doubt that.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
My point exactly- if the Charter was any kind of decent document it would state unequivocally that felons aren't permitted to be housed in resort like facilities.


The Charter does not go into such details, JLM. Charter outlines the rights that citizens have in general terms, it is not Charter’s place to go into details. Besides, who defines what constitutes resort like facilities? If Charter contained any such language, it would have been the laughing stock, not a respected, revered document.

The Charter or the constitution outlines general principles. How they are applied in practice is up to the politicians (who pass the laws) and the courts (who interpret the law and decide if they adhere to the Charter).

If you look at Bill of Rights or amendments to US Constitution, they are all short, concisely worded and general in nature, they do not go into the specifics. That is how it should be.

Because if Charter starts going into details, where does it end? Then it will have to define what is meant by ‘resort like conditions’. And do you think nine provinces were going to agree as to what constituted resort like conditions (it was necessary for the 9 provinces to ratify the Charter before it could be placed in the constitution)? Forget it.
 

countryboy

Traditionally Progressive
Nov 30, 2009
3,686
39
48
BC
The Charter does not go into such details, JLM. Charter outlines the rights that citizens have in general terms, it is not Charter’s place to go into details. Besides, who defines what constitutes resort like facilities? If Charter contained any such language, it would have been the laughing stock, not a respected, revered document.

The Charter or the constitution outlines general principles. How they are applied in practice is up to the politicians (who pass the laws) and the courts (who interpret the law and decide if they adhere to the Charter).

If you look at Bill of Rights or amendments to US Constitution, they are all short, concisely worded and general in nature, they do not go into the specifics. That is how it should be.

Because if Charter starts going into details, where does it end? Then it will have to define what is meant by ‘resort like conditions’. And do you think nine provinces were going to agree as to what constituted resort like conditions (it was necessary for the 9 provinces to ratify the Charter before it could be placed in the constitution)? Forget it.

...9 Provinces. Yeah, that's right...I've meaning to ask some of our forum experts (people more "in the know" than me, which would include pretty much everyone)...does the Charter apply to all of Canada, or is Quebec excluded? I was never sure of that, although I note that in the language section of the Charter, NB is specifically mentioned as being bilingual but Quebec is not. Or if it is, I missed it.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
...9 Provinces. Yeah, that's right...I've meaning to ask some of our forum experts (people more "in the know" than me, which would include pretty much everyone)...does the Charter apply to all of Canada, or is Quebec excluded? I was never sure of that, although I note that in the language section of the Charter, NB is specifically mentioned as being bilingual but Quebec is not. Or if it is, I missed it.

Yes, it is applicable to all of Canada, including Quebec, even though Quebec did not sign on to it. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if the Charter is more popular in Quebec than anywhere else.
 

crushem

New Member
Jan 13, 2010
8
2
3
island life
Anyone that thinks life in prison is a cakewalk is right, sort of. For those inmates whose life was one of continuous neglect, abuse and/or addiction it probably is.

However, the reason prisons have so many recreational facilities is not necessarily for the enjoyment of the inmate population. Instead this is one way the staff - especially the people who are guards - can breath a little easier. When the inmates time is occupied with sports, hobbies and other recreational activities that inmate is far less likely to be spending his/her time plotting on ways to get even by taking out a staff member. Also, the threat of losing those privleges - and they are privledges not prisoner rights - acts as another means of damping down and even controlling the inherent animosity between inmates and staff. And when those inmates are in there for life or awaiting a death sentence with no recreation or other distractions to look forward to, there really is nothing else we can do to them so why not take out some staff in the meantime?

As for the death sentence or life sentences, you have to be deaf, mute and blind not to have noticed all the wrongful convictions that have been overturned since DNA testing became possible. One only needs to reflect on the recent story of the Ontario coroner whose flawed pronouncements sent dozens of the wrongfully convicted to jail for years and devastated countless family members of both the convicted and the victims. And a system that cannot ensure that it actually has the right person cannot them blithely kill them or ignore their human needs for socialization and recreation.

Then there is the whole issue of imprisoning people. Sure there are a few that are so dangerous and predatory that they should be segregated from the rest of us in some way. But the vast majority of people that end up in jail and prisons are there because they don't know any better. That is to say, as children they may have been raised in that subculture of bikers, bars and drugs that circle criminal activities and, therefore, don't have an grasp of what civilized existence or their civic responsiblities. Or they may be suffering from mental or emotional problems that were never diagnosed or treated properly. In fact there are legions of these mentally and/or emotionally scarred citizens that have been abandoned to the streets and a life where you are either predator or prey.

There is a mountain of data to prove that jails and prisons and cops are all primarily designed to be reactive to crime, NOT to be proactive. But i and millions of others don't give a damn what is done to the offender after the fact.

What we need is a PRO-active response whereby the child is identified before become a criminal statistic and provided resources and support, where the mentally and emotionally ill are provided with the full time care and attention that so many of them need and the most dangerous and predatory amongst us have no place to hide anymore. There is great truth in the adage "pay now, or pay later" but make no mistake we are all paying for the small minded and short sightedness of those who manage our Justice system these days.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,443
2,957
113
L.A. Innocence Project takes on case of convicted wife-killer Scott Peterson
Author of the article:postmedia News
Published Jan 19, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 2 minute read

The Los Angeles Innocence Project has taken on one of California’s most infamous murder cases.


The LA Innocence Project is looking into the notorious case of Scott Peterson, who was convicted of murdering his 27-year-old, eight-months pregnant wife Laci. Her body was found in San Francisco Bay in April 2003.


Peterson, now 51, was found guilty of first-degree murder in the deaths of his wife and unborn son in 2004 and sentenced to death in 2005, although that was later overturned in 2020 and instead he got life without parole. He was moved from death row in October 2022.

LA Innocence Project suggests that Peterson’s constitutional rights were violated, including a “claim of actual innocence that is supported by newly discovered evidence,” according to court filings reported on by ABC News.

“New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson’s longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson,” the court filings say, according to ABC News.


The project lawyers are seeking items they couldn’t find after reviewing the trial files, including Laci Peterson’s Croton watch, and documents from interviews with a number of witnesses.

The director of the LA Innocence Project, Paula Mitchell, said she discovered “deficiencies” while looking at the discovery of Peterson’s case. She said that her investigation revealed witnesses who have been hesitant or expressed an “outright unwillingness” to give her information.

Scott Peterson pleaded not guilty to killing Laci and has always maintained his innocence. He said he did not receive a fair trial based on alleged juror misconduct, including that a woman known as Juror 7 had not disclosed her involvement in other legal proceedings.

Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo denied Peterson relief in his appeal for a new trial.

The LA Innocence Project provides pro bono legal services to people imprisoned in central and Southern California who may have been wrongfully convicted.

The group said in a statement Thursday, according to ABC News, that it is representing Peterson and “investigating his claim of actual innocence.”

Beyond that, the LA Innocence Project had “no further comment at this time.”
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,206
416
83
59
Alberta
L.A. Innocence Project takes on case of convicted wife-killer Scott Peterson
Author of the article:postmedia News
Published Jan 19, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 2 minute read

The Los Angeles Innocence Project has taken on one of California’s most infamous murder cases.


The LA Innocence Project is looking into the notorious case of Scott Peterson, who was convicted of murdering his 27-year-old, eight-months pregnant wife Laci. Her body was found in San Francisco Bay in April 2003.


Peterson, now 51, was found guilty of first-degree murder in the deaths of his wife and unborn son in 2004 and sentenced to death in 2005, although that was later overturned in 2020 and instead he got life without parole. He was moved from death row in October 2022.

LA Innocence Project suggests that Peterson’s constitutional rights were violated, including a “claim of actual innocence that is supported by newly discovered evidence,” according to court filings reported on by ABC News.

“New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson’s longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson,” the court filings say, according to ABC News.


The project lawyers are seeking items they couldn’t find after reviewing the trial files, including Laci Peterson’s Croton watch, and documents from interviews with a number of witnesses.

The director of the LA Innocence Project, Paula Mitchell, said she discovered “deficiencies” while looking at the discovery of Peterson’s case. She said that her investigation revealed witnesses who have been hesitant or expressed an “outright unwillingness” to give her information.

Scott Peterson pleaded not guilty to killing Laci and has always maintained his innocence. He said he did not receive a fair trial based on alleged juror misconduct, including that a woman known as Juror 7 had not disclosed her involvement in other legal proceedings.

Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo denied Peterson relief in his appeal for a new trial.

The LA Innocence Project provides pro bono legal services to people imprisoned in central and Southern California who may have been wrongfully convicted.

The group said in a statement Thursday, according to ABC News, that it is representing Peterson and “investigating his claim of actual innocence.”

Beyond that, the LA Innocence Project had “no further comment at this time.”

Wow. If he didn't do it, I wonder who did?