I have great respect for James Lockyer but the problem is that people do get wrongfully convicted without wrongdoing by anyone.
And that's why, as I have said here before, when someone is wrongfully convicted, and they did not act so as to encourage that conviction (say by making a false confession) they should receive compensation that is not premised on Crown wrongdoing.
If I spend time in jail for a crime I didn't commit I am just as injured regardless of whether or not the Crown failed.
Ontario refuses compensation for wrongfully-convicted men
Shannon Kari, National Post
The Ontario government announced Wednesday that it will not provide compensation to Robert Baltovich for the nearly nine years he spent in prison.
"After careful consideration of the factors relating to this matter, the Attorney-General has concluded that the payment of financial compensation is not appropriate in this case," said a statement issued Wednesday morning by the Ministry of the Attorney-General.
The province also announced that it would not compensate Anthony Hanemaayer, who spent nearly two years in jail for a sexual assault that was actually committed in 1987 by Paul Bernardo. The revelation about the innocence of Mr. Hanemaayer, came out as a result of a police interview of Bernardo, in advance of the re-trial of Mr. Baltovich in 2008.
In both cases the Crown and police "acted with integrity and in the best interests of the administration of justice," the province said in its written statements.
James Lockyer, who represented Mr. Baltovich and Mr. Hanemaayer, was critical of the decision by the Ontario government to deny compensation.
"How can they say they did nothing wrong? Do they think people get wrongly convicted by magic," asked Mr. Lockyer.
Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2437145#ixzz0cWaurCcv
7 comments:
400 k seems reasonable. To pay nothing is not justioe. I do not even think its smart government.
I hope they both sue and get 5x the amount that would have sufficed if the gov was just smart.
How, pray tell, can people be wrongfully convicted if the system and its players do what they are supposed to do in an ethical and professional manner? And why would anyone "encourage" their own conviction?
Good question -- basically a false confession
Defence lawyers sometimes advise clients to plead guilty to avoid a trial and take an assured lesser penalty versus risk a wrongful conviction with a long jail term. This likely happens more than many will admit. So what counts as a false confession? By Bentley's reasoning - it becomes the fault of the accused because she/he should have known better. Conversley, if the accused tells the judge she/he is not guilty but rather is simply pleading guilty to a lesser offence because she/he can't risk facing a greater penalty then the judge won't accept the plea. This is precisely what happened in some of the Dr. Charles Smith cases. People confessed to lesser charges on the advise of lawyers who bowed down to Smith's "expertise" for a decade. Maybe the reason Smith's victims are still waiting their long overdue compensation is because Bentley is about to adopt the same contorted reasoning to deny these fols compensation as well. Do you think the victim's of Dr. Smith's (now self-confessed "woefully inept") expertise "encouraged" their own convictions?
Hannemeyer wobt get $400 000. If Insurance settles I say closer to $200 000. Baltovich case has alot of no-no's done by the state. Judge, Crown and police all did very bad illegal things to him. If he gets less than $4 million Ill eat my tie. JM whats your take if you get a moment
excerpt from Star article:
"Defending his decision, Bentley noted Hanemaayer pleaded guilty.
But there are many reasons an innocent person might do so, said University of Western Ontario law professor Chris Sherrin. In Hanemaayer's case, the Crown's eyewitness identification, while clearly wrong, seemed overpowering and he was afraid he was heading to prison for six years.
When offered two years less a day in jail in exchange for a guilty plea, he took the deal."
Yesterday i bought viagra in [url=http://shoppharm.com]Online drugstore[/url].
On my surprise it works excellent! All the matter is that the price low, because I do not pay for the trade mark. That's all!
You can see explanations about it.
A generic drug (generic drugs, short: generics) is a drug which is produced and distributed without patent protection. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, generic drugs are identical bioequivalent range to the brand name counterpart with respect to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. By extension, therefore, generics are considered identical in dose, strength, route of administration, safety, efficacy, and intended use. In most cases, generic products are available once the patent protections afforded to the original developer have expired. When generic products become available, the market competition often leads to substantially lower prices for both the original brand name product and the generic forms. You can read more at http://shoppharm.com
Post a Comment