Mandatory minimum gun sentences 'cruel and unusual punishment'

[Locutus]

Ontario top court

TORONTO - Ontario's top court has ruled mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes are unconstitutional because they constitute "cruel and unusual punishment.

"The Ontario Court of Appeal convened a special panel to look at six recent gun cases dealing with the Harper government's 2008 tough-on-crime amendments that created mandatory minimum sentences.
"No system of criminal justice that would resort to punishments that “outrage standards of decency” in the name of furthering the goals of deterrence and denunciation could ever hope to maintain the respect and support of its citizenry.

"Similarly, no system of criminal justice that would make exposure to a draconian mandatory minimum penalty, the cost an accused must pay to go to trial on the merits of the charge, could pretend to have any fidelity to the search for the truth in the criminal justice system.

"Among the six cases was that of Leroy Smickle a 27-year-old Toronto man who faced an automatic three-year term for a first offender after police found him posing with his cousin's loaded handgun for Facebook. Justice Anne Molloy was the first judge in Ontario to challenge the new Conservative mandatory minimum and refused to sentence Smickle to three years.


ontario


Mandatory minimum gun sentences 'cruel and unusual punishment': Ontario top court | Toronto & GTA | News | Toronto Sun

 

[#juan]

This is complete nonsense. The minimum sentence was not a secret. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Get some new judges who will uphold the law.

 

[WLDB]

This is complete nonsense. The minimum sentence was not a secret. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Get some new judges who will uphold the law.

The judge isnt refusing to enforce it because it was a secret, but because she thinks its over the top. Judges have been doing that sort of thing for a long time. Its part of their job. It will no doubt go up to a higher court now.

 

[The Old Medic]

Unfortunately, far too many Judges believe that they can legislate from the Bench.

I sincerely hope that this decision is overturned.

 

[taxslave]

This is complete nonsense. The minimum sentence was not a secret. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Get some new judges who will uphold the law.

Sure, if it is actually a crime. As I recall what this guy was doing is a paper crime. That is it was only a crime because it is written on a piece of paper somewhere. The solution is don't write stupid laws.

 

[Colpy]

This is complete nonsense. The minimum sentence was not a secret. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Get some new judges who will uphold the law.

Ahh...you've read the Criminal Code cover to cover??

What is complete nonsense is a three year jail term for a kid with no criminal intent.

Sure, if it is actually a crime. As I recall what this guy was doing is a paper crime. That is it was only a crime because it is written on a piece of paper somewhere. The solution is don't write stupid laws.

The solution is do away with mandatory minimums, appoint judges on merit instead of political patronage, and let a flexible justice system do its work properly.

 

[Goober]

The judge isnt refusing to enforce it because it was a secret, but because she thinks its over the top. Judges have been doing that sort of thing for a long time. Its part of their job. It will no doubt go up to a higher court now.

A number of min sentence cases have been overturned- Off to the SCoC they go.