Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the convictions of Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier on conspiracy to commit murder for the benefit of a terrorist group – August 31, 2019,
So admittedly I’m not a law professional, nor do I entirely understand the Canadian judicial system, I’m pretty sure most criminals know more about the Canadian Judicial system than I do because I try to stay out of trouble. With that said the article below brought an economic thought to my attention which is allowing criminals to avoid jail time, primarily because of the costs involved to imprison them.
The error in law means the two men will have to be tried again, at great cost to the public. ,
Christopher Husbands was convicted in 2015 of two counts of second-degree murder and a host of related charges after he opened fire with a handgun in a crowded food court in the Eaton Centre in downtown Toronto in 2012. Husbands killed two men, and shot a third, a 13-year-old boy, in the head. He also wounded several others.
In Husbands’ case, the Ontario Superior Court judge, the now-retired Eugene Ewaschuk, imposed static triers over the explicit objection of the defence. The Appeal Court overturned his ruling in a scathing judgement and sent the case back down. Husbands was retried and convicted on lesser charges of manslaughter earlier this year.
But the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned his conviction in 2017. The judge in Husbands’ case, the appeal court ruled, badly misapplied the standards governing the way racial bias is judged in jury selection.
The judge in Jaser and Esseghaier’s case also imposed static triers, for a different reason. Jaser’s lawyers wanted rotating triers to judge each potential juror without the rest of the panel in the courtroom.
The three-judge appeal panel ruled unanimously Tuesday that Code got that wrong. The error, they ruled, was so grave that the only way to fix it was to vacate the convictions against both men.
If that seems to you like an obscure and rather strange reason to upend an entire criminal trial, you’re not alone. It’s certainly an only-in-Canada phenomenon.
The obscure Canadian law that keeps screwing up high-profile criminal trials – NationalPost.com
Now, you can read the entire article for yourself it’s called The obscure Canadian law that keeps screwing up high-profile criminal trials you can read it on the National Post website.
Social justice-related issues is a topic I have little opinion on, Canada doesn’t have a history of Sanctioned slavery, with the exception of First Nations peoples, we’re all immigrants and made a choice to move here and build up this country. One of the problems with Canadian law is that we tend to take pieces of U.S law and try to apply them here. This is wrong, primarily because there is no history or proof of systematic racism in Canada against people’s who aren’t First Nations.
Mass Migration is extremely Expensive
Now, being that prosecutors can even bring this up in a court is evidence that a multi-cultural society is inherently flawed. If you read the National Post article, what this ultimately comes down too is the cost to the public. Now, let me ask the reader a serious question, do you think imprisoning an individual for 25+ is cheap? Of course, it’s not, regarding Judges, is hiring a judge cheap? Of course not, this entire process is very expensive to the taxpayer, but what’s even more expensive is mass migration.
It’s normal for people to want to fight for their homeland, clearly Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier don’t view Canada as their homeland, clearly, Christopher Husbands doesn’t see Canada as their homelands, because they’re using portions of the law to separate themselves from the rest of Canadians. No, I’m not a Canadian, I’m a Black Canadian in the case of Christopher Husbands and this means that I should be trialed differently than you would try a white Canadian. Now, I live in Toronto and well, white supremacists don’t shoot up malls, but let’s say one did and used the Race and being part of a minority as his basis for defense and eventually his murder charge was changed to manslaughter, what kind of message would that send? Remember Christopher Husbands killed a 13-year-old boy?
In regards to the Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier, the point the National Post writer was trying to make was Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier are using similar loopholes in Canada’s justice system and based on how the law is written, it’s their Right to do it. Now, for me, I see the economics of the argument and this is why again I make m plea to Canadians to end the Welfare State.
You remove Welfare, many will self deport, it’s happened all throughout history, now what you’ll never prevent are people who may come here to work only to bring back money to their homelands, but I’ve never thought of that as a problem in a Fiat currency based world. What’s problematic in my mind is Welfare and a Superiority complex. A lot of supposed minority group want to be put in special entitlement classes and this, of course, leads to the destruction of society. Am I saying get rid of Welfare altogether? No, but shrink it, minimize it, stop voting to expand it, stop creating Crown Corporations to solve a problem the Private Sector can solve.
If Canada didn’t have so much protectionism and tariffs at the U.S border, our purchasing power would be greater which would help us to raise the standard of living for the poor. Private Sector charities would have more capital and private sector charities are much better suited to deal with poverty than the government is. When people can no longer look to the Government as an economic safe haven, certain problems like the one mentioned in this post typically won’t happen as often, because idleness is devil playground.
The Social Welfare Raed Jaser, Chiheb Esseghaier, and Christopher Husbands received under the law is expensive, this is, of course, emboldening more gang and terrorist activity in Canada. Being that Canadian laws make it hard for Canadian citizens to protect themselves, this puts an additional financial strain on Canada’s Public Sector. Now, this is fine as long as criminal activity in Canada is low, but if criminal activity increases, we can clearly see that a precedent has set for the social welfares criminal minorities will receive under the law.
If Canadians want to preserve the Welfare State, they may want to reconsider mass migration!
Interesting times ahead!