• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Victoria is facing a public-safety crisis

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
4,343
Points
1,060
He should have been released into the Judge’s custody and recognizance.

Or into the harbour ;)
Honestly, f**k that.

I wrote a post based on the tidbit here, then read the article, then deleted my original post....Should have just shot him. Seriously.

Proud Of You Reaction GIF
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
4,343
Points
1,060
Another Officer down....


Victoria police officer injured while apprehending man on Gorge Road East​


A Victoria police officer was hospitalized Wednesday morning after being assaulted while apprehending a man suffering a mental-health crisis.
Officers went to a motel in the 100-block of Gorge Road East about 10 a.m. after a man called police, threatened to kill people and said that there was a dead person on his balcony.

Police found the man outside the building and realized he was having a mental-health crisis. Officers tried to de-escalate the situation, but said when they tried to apprehend him under the Mental Health Act, he began to fight and punched one officer several time. Police said they used a conducted-energy weapon on the man, but he continued to struggle.

After more officers arrived, the man was taken into custody, then taken to hospital for a mental-health assessment.

The injured officer was treated for a concussion and was unable to complete his shift.



And yet more arson....

Police investigate string of arson fires in James Bay​


Victoria police are looking for witnesses, surveillance footage and dashcam video after four arson fires Tuesday in residential parking areas in James Bay near Beacon Hill Park.

It began with a vehicle fire just before 3 a.m. in a parking area under some suites at a building on Academy Close. Two vehicles were damaged, along with the exterior walls of the suite above.

 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
672
Points
910
"While the weapon he was using has been seized, the man, who cannot be identified by police as he has not been charged, has been set free with a court date and orders not to possess weapons."
Something is missing here. How can he be given a court date and not have been charged?
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
584
Points
1,040
A court date, and conditions…

Very much indeed something is missing.

In BC, the police don't charge you, they will give you conditions and a "promise to appear" date. They will then spend two or three months putting together their file to recommend to Crown Counsel that charges be laid. Crown Counsel is the one that charges you.

There is some logic to this. Quite often the charges are fairly minor so it gives the Crown Counsel time to look at the facts and decide whether it's actually worth it to go forward. As well, if the accused breaks/violates their conditions or misses their dates, they can be found in contempt of the court, which is usually way worse than what they were probably going to be charged with in the first place and then they are looking at actual jail time.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
2,103
Points
990
It doesn't even depend on the crown charge approval thing. Charges are not laid until an information alleging the offences is sworn in front of a J.P. It's totally normal for police to arrest someone, determine from preliminary investigation that a charge is likely, and cut the person loose with a court date and release conditions, with the actual swearing of a charge to follow up later. Pretty much anyone who is ever arrested and released from custody with an appearance document and who isn't held for a bail hearing falls into this category.

Good example- it's 2:30 AM and I catch a drunk driver. Straightforward first offense impaired, no injuries, no reason to hold them for a bail hearing. I release them with a court date a month down the road. It'll take me a few working days to get my court file together, gather notes from other officers, my in car video, video from the cell block, etc. Once I have everything, THEN I submit my court pack and the charges are sworn.

So yeah, completely normal for charges to be laid later. If we arrest someone and hold them for a J.P., to argue to either a hold in custody, or for stricter conditions than we can impose, THEN we have to swear a charge before the court appearance. Extra fun when you get that file at 4 a.m. and your shift is supposed to be done at 5...
 

Booter

Jr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
74
Points
330
Something is missing here. How can he be given a court date and not have been charged?
The information and swearing of it isn’t complete- until then the person can’t be identified as they aren’t “charged”.

Like Brihard said it can be a time of day thing, or HB- a crown pre-charge thing, or sometimes even a complexity of the disclosure thing.

Given a date and a series of conditions so they have the benefit of a quick release while awaiting the process.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,802
Points
910
The information and swearing of it isn’t complete- until then the person can’t be identified as they aren’t “charged”.

Like Brihard said it can be a time of day thing, or HB- a crown pre-charge thing, or sometimes even a complexity of the disclosure thing.

Given a date and a series of conditions so they have the benefit of a quick release while awaiting the process.
This is all very informational. At what point (and by whom) can the accused be remanded into custody to await the charge process? What is the trigger- the severity of the incident (I assume)?
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
672
Points
910
It doesn't even depend on the crown charge approval thing. Charges are not laid until an information alleging the offences is sworn in front of a J.P. It's totally normal for police to arrest someone, determine from preliminary investigation that a charge is likely, and cut the person loose with a court date and release conditions, with the actual swearing of a charge to follow up later. Pretty much anyone who is ever arrested and released from custody with an appearance document and who isn't held for a bail hearing falls into this category.

Good example- it's 2:30 AM and I catch a drunk driver. Straightforward first offense impaired, no injuries, no reason to hold them for a bail hearing. I release them with a court date a month down the road. It'll take me a few working days to get my court file together, gather notes from other officers, my in car video, video from the cell block, etc. Once I have everything, THEN I submit my court pack and the charges are sworn.

So yeah, completely normal for charges to be laid later. If we arrest someone and hold them for a J.P., to argue to either a hold in custody, or for stricter conditions than we can impose, THEN we have to swear a charge before the court appearance. Extra fun when you get that file at 4 a.m. and your shift is supposed to be done at 5...
That provides more context than the single sentence in the article. Clearly, I need more sleep as we use CCC 498(1) a lot and I should've figured this out.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
672
Points
910
This is all very informational. At what point (and by whom) can the accused be remanded into custody to await the charge process? What is the trigger- the severity of the incident (I assume)?
CCC 498(1.1) lays out the conditions under which an arrested person would be retained in custody. This is colloquially known as RICE:

  • to prevent Repetition or continuation of the offence;
  • to establish the Identity of the accused;
  • to ensure the accused will appear in Court; and
  • to preserve Evidence.

If all these conditions are met then the accused must be released.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
2,103
Points
990
This is all very informational. At what point (and by whom) can the accused be remanded into custody to await the charge process? What is the trigger- the severity of the incident (I assume)?
So, generally that's our call as the initial arresting/investigating officers. Someone arrested and held in custody has to be brought before a Justice of the Peace generally within 24 hours (if one is available - not all places have weekend JPs), or ASAP as soon as one becomes available.

There are a number of different grounds on which we might argue to hold someone in custody. The primary ground is to ensure their attendance in court, and that carries the most weight. A history of failure to appear, escape custody, current outstanding warrants in other jurisdictions etc strengthens that. A plethora of other reasons exist too- protecting the victim or the public, the likelihood of repetition if released (e.g., chronic offenders), previous breaches of release conditions, confirming the identity of the accused, whether the release would be bring the administration of justice into disrepute (this one has less weight), anbd the seriousness of the matter and strength of the crown's case can come into play. There are also reverse onus cases where the presumption of release doesn't apply and the accused has to show why they ought to be- these generally apply to specific offences.

The S.498(1.1) quoted by OldSoldier has to do with if we arrest someone and do not intend to bring them before a justice. Basically it means that if we intend to cut them lose with a court date, we need to get on with it.

All that said- the opinions of police actually attending and working the files, and the opinions of JPs on the wisdom of releasing a given offender definitely does not always align. Sometimes the JP is right, sometimes we are. When we're right, it usually means the offender was released and went and did something else stupid that was reasonably predictable. The general trend in the criminal justice system is away form pre-trial custody wherever possible.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
378
Points
1,130

I'm not sure of the exact guaranteed response time here in Edmonton, but the guaranteed response time from Edmonton Fire is approximately 3 minutes.
That's pretty fast.

Especially when Alarm Answering Time and Alarm Processing Time is considered.
That will vary if the Call Originator pulled a fire alarm box, or dialed 9-1-1.

Then add "Chute" Time. That's from when the tones go off in the station, until the "rubber hits the road". That tends to vary between day and night.

Then Travel Time.

When the water actually comes out of the hose, or the shock is delivered to a patient can depend on location. eg: If it is up in a high-rise, or down in a ravine etc.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
672
Points
910
There are a number of different grounds on which we might argue to hold someone in custody. The primary ground is to ensure their attendance in court, and that carries the most weight. A history of failure to appear, escape custody, current outstanding warrants in other jurisdictions etc strengthens that.
Some of that also depends on if the jurisdiction holding the outstanding warrant wants it executed by the arresting service and under what statute (i.e. criminal or provincial offences) the warrant was issued. Some warrants have a radius (e.g. 500 km, province or Canada-wide) outside of which the issuing service will not go through the cost and effort of extradition to their jurisdiction. An example would be an accused who has a warrant for theft under $5000 in Oromocto, with a radius of NB, but who is arrested in Vancouver. Next time he gets picked up in NB, the warrant is executed.
The S.498(1.1) quoted by OldSoldier ....
That was me, actually.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
2,103
Points
990
Some of that also depends on if the jurisdiction holding the outstanding warrant wants it executed by the arresting service and under what statute (i.e. criminal or provincial offences) the warrant was issued. Some warrants have a radius (e.g. 500 km, province or Canada-wide) outside of which the issuing service will not go through the cost and effort of extradition to their jurisdiction. An example would be an accused who has a warrant for theft under $5000 in Oromocto, with a radius of NB, but who is arrested in Vancouver. Next time he gets picked up in NB, the warrant is executed.

That was me, actually.
Brain fart, sorry.

And yeah- most warrants are limited to a province, or even narrower radius. They function more as a 'stay the hell out of our jurisdiction' than as a serious endeavour to return the person to face justice. But we'll absolutely use their existence to show that the individual has a history of evading justice, and it will inform the JP's decision via its inclusion in a bail brief.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
672
Points
910
Brain fart, sorry.

And yeah- most warrants are limited to a province, or even narrower radius. They function more as a 'stay the hell out of our jurisdiction' than as a serious endeavour to return the person to face justice.
No worries.

I've heard non-returnable warrants described as being the modern equivalent of being "run out of town" by the sheriff. 🤠
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
4,343
Points
1,060
Brain fart, sorry.

And yeah- most warrants are limited to a province, or even narrower radius. They function more as a 'stay the hell out of our jurisdiction' than as a serious endeavour to return the person to face justice. But we'll absolutely use their existence to show that the individual has a history of evading justice, and it will inform the JP's decision via its inclusion in a bail brief.

Apparently this is exactly what's driving alot of the 'Pond Life' activity around here, which is tragic for the genuinely disadvantaged honest people of course.
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,630
Points
910
We have a gentleman in custody here that shouldn't be here. Can we ship him to Victoria? He'd fit right in.

All joking aside, there must be a greater effort to focus on mental health from all levels of government. Mental health guys don't do well in jail, and very few staff have any training in mental health.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
691
Points
990
We have a gentleman in custody here that shouldn't be here. Can we ship him to Victoria? He'd fit right in.

All joking aside, there must be a greater effort to focus on mental health from all levels of government. Mental health guys don't do well in jail, and very few staff have any training in mental health.
We had quite a few folks in custody here who didn’t belong in custody either, but there was simply nowhere else for them to go - and some crown prosecutor convinced some judge that sitting in a 15x15 room was somehow in both society’s best interest at and theirs. Not so.

She actually would have been better off in Victoria I’d think. At least she’d have some level of freedom to access services that we can’t provide, nor do we even offer them.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
691
Points
990
That provides more context than the single sentence in the article. Clearly, I need more sleep as we use CCC 498(1) a lot and I should've figured this out.
I read that sentence the same way you did.

To all who clarified - thank you. I think Haggis and I were on the same brainwave last night.

(Anybody else work a night shift, stay awake all day the day prior and after, then wake up curious to read what they posted on Army.ca? If not, and you’re looking for a middle aged sense of adventure, I highly recommend it!)
 
Top