OPP Officer Shot and Killed Near Ohsweken- Dec 27th/2022

[KevinB]

From the above article.

That document said that during the robbery, which happened in 2017, McKenzie pointed a handgun at a restaurant owner, ordering him to hand over his car keys and money, said the news agency.


“You pled guilty, and described that you needed money for drugs,” the document says.

The document says McKenzie has experienced the negative impacts of colonialism.

“Your biological parents struggled with alcohol and were neglectful,” it reads.

“You believe your adopted grandfather may have attended residential school ... You have suffered abuse, experienced addiction and have been disconnected from your family and cultural community. These losses and negative experiences are likely linked to your offending.”

“Intergenerational trauma is a real thing,” McKenzie’s family said in their statement.

I’m just a little sick that some parts of society feel that this somehow excuses personal responsibility for one’s conduct.

 

[YZT580]

Nope, he was out on bail when he (allegedly) committed the murder.

on the other hand, if he had driven an F250 into OW and then had the temerity to sleep in its cab for two weeks whilst burning old skids in a barrel and waving a f**k Tr******au signthere would have been no bail, his bank account would be frozen and the truck in a police compound. Please please someone tell me I am overly cynical.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

on the other hand, if he had driven an F250 into OW and then had the temerity to sleep in its cab for two weeks whilst burning old skids in a barrel and waving a f**k Tr******au signthere would have been no bail, his bank account would be frozen and the truck in a police compound. Please please someone tell me I am overly cynical.

There is a difference. Those folks went to court defiant,.......this clown was probably all "Yes sir, no sir, I double promise to be good....."

 

[OldSolduer]

From the above article.

That document said that during the robbery, which happened in 2017, McKenzie pointed a handgun at a restaurant owner, ordering him to hand over his car keys and money, said the news agency.


“You pled guilty, and described that you needed money for drugs,” the document says.

The document says McKenzie has experienced the negative impacts of colonialism.

“Your biological parents struggled with alcohol and were neglectful,” it reads.

“You believe your adopted grandfather may have attended residential school ... You have suffered abuse, experienced addiction and have been disconnected from your family and cultural community. These losses and negative experiences are likely linked to your offending.”

“Intergenerational trauma is a real thing,” McKenzie’s family said in their statement.

I’m just a little sick that some parts of society feel that this somehow excuses personal responsibility for one’s conduct.

We have a number of apologists in white society - even an Indigenous MLA called them “white do gooders” who absolutely have fallen for this line of thinking.

 

[Good2Golf]

Jesus, I don't understand how anyone gets bail on first degree murder charge with a history of bail violations and non-compliance to court orders to not have a firearm after previous convictions. That kind of decision undermines the premise behind the Supreme Court rationale. It's not like it's a weak or circumstancial case. He's there because he shot and killed a cop after terrorizing his ex and child and stabbing someone.

Being indigenous and his personal history may become mitigating factors during sentencing (and would come up in a Gladue report), but at this point is irrelevant to the crimes that were committed. It wasn't like he was up for bail on a misdemeanor or a minor felony.

is there anything in our justice system that allows us to charge the judge? At the very least he has demonstrated complete contempt for those indigenous peoples who don't run around murdering others.

No, not in the least, and there would be nothing to charge for here. The judge made a bad call, but made it based on prior case law and on the legislation passed by the will of Parliament. Making a bad call on a bail case isn’t a misconduct, and the independence of the judiciary is important to protect. If we want to see the pendulum swung back on bail reform, that’s a Parliament thing.

Links firmly back to Trudeau’s will (which becomes Parliament’s will these days) that sees an apologist perspective against disadvantaged minorities, even in the (alleged - as yet unproven in court) commission of violent crimes, release them into society pending court action. Canadians are expected to accept the government’s flavour of addressing violence, particularly gun violence by increasingly constricting legal firearm ownership, whilst restricting the justice systems ability to protect against (alleged) known/high risk offenders, by rescinding the minimum sentencing limits for aggravated/armed assault/robbery/etc.

Again, it should come as not a surprise to Canadians that violent crime has steadily increased since Trudeau took power, after a previous non-partisan reduction of violent crime in Canada for the previous decade and a half under PMs of multiple parties…Chrétien, Martin, Harper…all of them saw periods of consistently reducing violent crime in Canada. Trudeau…Bam! Welcome to a consistently more violent Canada, folks! Expect more of the same, while Trudeau’s misplace and malinformed apologetic release of demographically ‘disadvantaged’ violent offenders continues.

Canada: violent crime rate 2023 | Statista

The rate of incidents of violent criminal code violations in Canada increased by 51.1 incidents (+3.71 percent) in 2023 in comparison to the previous year.

www.statista.com

 

[brihard]

you missed the main point: contempt for the innocent. The law as it stands allows for the refusal of bail. He had both precedence in law and a known history by the alleged perpetrator of ignoring and defying the law. He deliberately placed the perceived rights of the felon over the rights of other innocent Canadians to live in a safe environment.

I didn’t miss anything. A specific question was asked and I gave a specific answer. I don’t like what happened, but I’m still gonna do my best to answer correctly.

 

[Navy_Pete]

For some background, pretty sure the Supreme Court decision referenced is from 2012, and a lot of this dates back to the 1990s, so well before Trudeau. It's reinforced in the TRC findings.

The intent of the gladue reports, alternate sentencing arrangements etc all make sense to me and I agree in principle with, but I think there is a reasonable limit to how much latitude you give for the offender's background context and this is way past that, as the guy has already demonstrated he won't respect court conditions and is a danger to others.

Gladue report - Wikipedia

 

[Kat Stevens]

Wouldn’t it be nice if judges could be charged with aiding and abetting or accessory to crimes committed by revolving door bail recipients that they turned loose?

 

[YZT580]

I didn’t miss anything. A specific question was asked and I gave a specific answer. I don’t like what happened, but I’m still gonna do my best to answer correctly.

appreciate that, thanks but I tend to agree with Navy Pete's comments that this is far beyond a reasonable employment of alternative solutions

 

[brihard]

Wouldn’t it be nice if judges could be charged with aiding and abetting or accessory to crimes committed by revolving door bail recipients that they turned loose?

No it wouldn’t. It would wreck judicial independence and make a laughingstock of the presumption of innocence and the right to bail. The judges are generally doing a decent job of working within the established set of rules. If you want a different output from the same inputs, you need something changed in the mechanics of the process between the two.

 

[Kat Stevens]

No it wouldn’t. It would wreck judicial independence and make a laughingstock of the presumption of innocence and the right to bail. The judges are generally doing a decent job of working within the established set of rules. If you want a different output from the same inputs, you need something changed in the mechanics of the process between the two.

I was joking, but what makes judges above the standards that little old lowly me would face if I were to assist in the commission of a crime before the fact by acts either overt or covert? My assumption of the perpetrators innocence isn't taken into account in that instance. And, remand happens all the time, why not ALL the time for repeat violent offenders? My dad never hugged me much either and his dad was awful to him, it wouldn't get me a centimeter of slack in court.

 

[brihard]

I was joking, but what makes judges above the standards that little old lowly me would face if I were to assist in the commission of a crime before the fact by acts either overt or covert? My assumption of the perpetrators innocence isn't taken into account in that instance. And, remand happens all the time, why not ALL the time for repeat violent offenders? My dad never hugged me much either and his dad was awful to him, it wouldn't get me a centimeter of slack in court.

Shrug write your MP. I’m just a super tiny player in one facet of a big system.

 

[Good2Golf]

I was joking, but what makes judges above the standards that little old lowly me would face if I were to assist in the commission of a crime before the fact by acts either overt or covert? My assumption of the perpetrators innocence isn't taken into account in that instance. And, remand happens all the time, why not ALL the time for repeat violent offenders? My dad never hugged me much either and his dad was awful to him, it wouldn't get me a centimeter of slack in court.

As @brihard noted, it’s not the judges not doing their jobs, it’s them working within the justice-related legislation that they are bound to judge by.

Trudeau in both Bills C-21 and C-5 is resetting the implications of illegal weapon use and associated sentence length. There is a nexus in the changes that have resulted in a reversal of the historical reduction of violent crime…instead, moistly-spoken virtuous word salad is used in an attempt to push the irrational gun crime and minimum sentencing agenda, and obfuscate what is otherwise a blatantly evident trend of increasing violence resulting from such virtuously misplaced apologetic/selective-leniency agenda.

LILLEY: Trudeau reducing sentencing requirements for serious gun crimes

Smuggling illegal guns and selling them on the street is a big problem, so why is Trudeau dropping sentencing requirements for these crimes?

torontosun.com

 

[KevinB]

Sometimes some people regardless of disadvantaged backgrounds or upbringing just should be flushed away, and not given bail.

 

[brihard]

Sometimes some people regardless of disadvantaged backgrounds or upbringing just should be flushed away, and not given bail.

Depending on their actions and the articulable grounds recognized in our law, absolutely some shouldn’t be.

 

[YZT580]

As @brihard noted, it’s not the judges not doing their jobs, it’s them working within the justice-related legislation that they are bound to judge by.

Trudeau in both Bills C-21 and C-5 is resetting the implications of illegal weapon use and associated sentence length. There is a nexus in the changes that have resulted in a reversal of the historical reduction of violent crime…instead, moistly-spoken virtuous word salad is used in an attempt to push the irrational gun crime and minimum sentencing agenda, and obfuscate what is otherwise a blatantly evident trend of increasing violence resulting from such virtuously misplaced apologetic/selective-leniency agenda.

LILLEY: Trudeau reducing sentencing requirements for serious gun crimes

Smuggling illegal guns and selling them on the street is a big problem, so why is Trudeau dropping sentencing requirements for these crimes?

torontosun.com

wow, do you share a writer with Re Murphy? (no sarcasm)

 

[Good2Golf]

wow, do you share a writer with Re Murphy? (no sarcasm)

I must have read a lot of him since being a small kid, but especially a bit earlier his work and then also with Christie Blatchford’s straight up ‘hard to argue with that’ work, that’s where I think I’ve ended up. I’m not a fan of cults-of-personality…of any camp.

 

[YZT580]

I must have read a lot of him since being a small kid, but especially a bit earlier his work and then also with Christie Blatchford’s straight up ‘hard to argue with that’ work, that’s where I think I’ve ended up. I’m not a fan of cults-of-personality…of any camp.

good pair of styles to reference when writing. And now back to law. If judges can and do question legislation regarding mandatory minimums shouldn't they be just as conscientious regarding issues favouring leniency as well? Or are they and we just miss that in our selective news broadcasts?

 

[brihard]

good pair of styles to reference when writing. And now back to law. If judges can and do question legislation regarding mandatory minimums shouldn't they be just as conscientious regarding issues favouring leniency as well? Or are they and we just miss that in our selective news broadcasts?

I’ve seen judges reverse the granting of bail on request by the crown; I’ve seen judges ruled proposed sentences unfit and impose stiffer ones. These things do happen too.

 

[singh1947]

is there anything in our justice system that allows us to charge the judge? At the very least he has demonstrated complete contempt for those indigenous peoples who don't run around murdering others.

Singh believes that the police officer he knew in this case should have been unarmed. Probably not the best place to pose the question.

Not sure on the first point, and would be interested in how other countries handle it.
Accusations of a Kritarchy (rule of judges) have been common lately, and I'm not sure I understand how liberal democracy intends to deal with it.

I guess parliament can legislate on an issue.
Hard to do so when facing public opinion & the media even in a clear case of right/wrong.

--
On the second part you made a good point about patrolling in isolated rural areas.
So I'd think it's fair to be armed in that case.
Not trying to walk my comments back - parking enforcement officers are unarmed for example.

The point Brihard made about professional competency and policy adherence being unrelated to his opinion or mine was also a good one.