Failed again . . .

A week ago, a story appeared in The Province about a rather innocuous sign of the times - thefts of bags from unsuspecting visitors at Vancouver International Airport.

But, what was glossed over was the identification of an arrested suspect in the spate of thefts. Ramon Rafael Montesinos Chavoro, 36, was arrested, charged with Theft over $5000 - an indictable offence in Canada - and released on $5,000 bail. And that’s not posted bail as in real dollars. No, indeed, that means “promised” dollars. Or, in more simple terms, nothing.

But, hang on a second, Chavoro is a Mexican national. Is he in Canada legally? And even if he is, why would we allow a foreign national to come here, allegedly commit a series of crimes and allow him to be freed on minor bail conditions?

Does he have a previous criminal history in Canada? What about in his home country?

This is ridiculous at any level. Made especially moreso since we learned this week, courtesy of the federal Auditor General Shelia Fraser, that the Canadian Border Services Agency had lost track of 41,000 illegal immigrants, most of whom are failed refugee claimants. 

It seems that in this country it matters not whether you are a failed refugee claimant or a serial criminal, what passes for a justice system in Canada will let you go with little or no restrictions on your freedoms. 

I must confess I am at a loss here to try and understand whatever logic exists to pretend that such a system is somehow tolerable or that this system “works” by any definition.

Who are these 41,000 failed refugee claimants? I don’t know and the government won’t tell us. We don’t know if they are gypsy thieves, Russian strippers or al Qaeda terrorist. And the sad part is that the government hasn’t a clue either to go along with where they might be. 

But they do know who Chavoro is and what he’s all about. And yet the system still let him go instead of holding him in custody pending trial. And if, as is most likely, he is found guilty he should be deported after serving whatever sentence the court might impose. Which, of course would be nothing more than time served. But, at least the government could have packed him aboard a plane and sent him back to his homeland and in doing so, lived up to their responsibility to protect the public.

But sadly, that is not what happened in this case. Or in the thousands and thousands of others like this.

Leo Knight

Prime Time Crime.com

Immigration decision a mystery

It's difficult to try and be respectful of the Canadian justice system when you get decisions such as the one rendered by Immigration adjudicator Daphne Shaw Dyck in the case of Jose Franciso Cardoza Quinteros, an admitted killer and member of the notoriously violent Latino gang Mara Salvatrucha or more commonly known as MS 13.

But then, I have come to expect so very little of a system designed to be overseen by people with little or no training for the role they are performing. For most, it seems the only qualification is to have connections to whatever political party is in power and makes the appointments.

Now, I don't know the adjudicator with the double-barrelled family name. And, it may well be that from time to time she gets it right. But then, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

What I can and will say is that she is so wrong in this case that one has to question her competence to sit in judgement of immigration claims. When a waste of oxygen like this has already admitted to being a member of MS 13 and a participant in gangland murders, I sincerely question her ability to process information presented.

How she came to the conclusion that this lothesome individial was likely not a gang banger because, well, I have no idea. She had no evidence before her that said this goof was anything but what he said he was.

The real problem here is not that this adjudicator went off the reservation in this case, but rather that there are so many of these 'appointees' in similar positions of power to put at risk the rest of society in Canada. And there is precious little we can do about it.

It seems that Pierre Trudeau's so called "Just Society" is really anything but.

Leo Knight

primetimecrime@gmail.com

And justice for all . . . to not see

No one will ever accuse me of being a defender of the Hells Angels. In point of fact, I am on record on many occasions saying that police must be given more tools and more resources to fight not only the bikers, but all aspects of organized crime. Which, I might add, notwithstanding the abdication of responsibility by Madame Justice Anne MacKenzie in the trial of full-patch member David Francis Giles, the Hells Angels are clearly a criminal organization as has been stated by courts in BC and Ontario in previous decisions.

Having said all that, there is something decidedly wrong with what has occurred in the sentencing of three unnamed members of the biker gang for contempt of court.

I don't know what has gone on in camera in this case in which Madame Justice MacKenzie agreed to a ban on publication of the names. And that is essentially the problem. The old adage is that Justice must not only be done, but it must be seen to be done.

How can we determine if justice was in fact done in this case if we cannot know the names and the details of the offense? Justice carried out behind a curtain is not justice in a democracy. It may pass for justice in a tin-pot dictatorship like Cuba, but it is not justice in my eyes.

Madame Justice MacKenzie demonstrated a profound lack of understanding of the Hells Angels and how their business operates in her judgement in Giles case. That lack of understanding is, in my view, a disservice to the public. The contempt citations against unnamed individuals who were allegedly a part of the criminal enterprise is nothing more than a furtherance of the disservice.

Leo Knight

primetimecrime@gmail.com

China Syndrome

On March 14th, 2008, the Government of the People's Republic of China began a crackdown on Tibetan citizens protesting against occupying power that began with the invasion of their country by the People's Liberation Army in 1950 and continues to this day.

The West, for the most part, immediately condemned the latest blatant human rights abuses by a government that seeks to dominate, if not the world, then all of Asia at the least. And, under the jackbooted heel of Communist tyranny. Well, the two front-runners for the Democratic Presidential nomination in the US, B. Hussein Obama and the former First Lady and current junior Senator from New York, who, amazingly enough, single-handedly ended 35 years of the troubles in Northern Ireland - well, that's what she said - were about 12 days late before recoiling in abject horror and metaphorically crying crocodile tears.

So, after sending in the troops to crush the demonstrations and forcing the oppressed people of Tibet into hiding, they actually announced that hundreds of the protestors had "surrendered." (See China says hundreds have surrendered)

Imagine that, surrendering to a regime that kills those people at will who don't or won't grasp the teachings of the Red Book. Yeah, I'll bet they were surendering in droves.

The Government of the PRC is a disgusting regime that engages in systemic human rights violations on a daily basis, never mind the brutal abuses such as have occured in Tibet in the past fortnight or Tianammen Square in the late 80's. Crushing a student protest in the Forbidden City or deluding a complicit Western media on Tibet, it's all the same: oppressive Communist regime takes advantage of the useful idiots in the Western media. Since the days of Lenin, nothing changes.

What puzzles, is why we continue to placate, ignore and turn a blind eye? Or, how exactly were the PRC actually awarded the Summer Olympics? Who did they buy?

Leo Knight

primetimecrime@gmail.com

The truth shall set you free . . .unless you are a federal civil servant

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. – George Orwell

The story of former Foreign Services employee Joanna Gualtieri’s battle with the bureaucrats in the federal government should make every Canadian angry. Not just pissed about a waste of taxpayer’s money, but “I want a Revolution” angry.

Gaultieri bore witness and tried to report to corruption and waste and tried to do her job. Apparently, telling the truth is a big mistake in the civil service. Now the mandarins who earn their living by sucking on the public teat are trying to crush Gualteri under a ton of legal bullshit.

So Gualtieri is saying that some foreign consulates are wasting money. Hmmm . . .I’d be surprised if ALL foreign consulates aren’t wasting money. She is saying that corruption is present at some foreign missions. Again, I’d be surprised if there wasn’t an element of corruption at all foreign missions.

I’ve seen this movie time and again. This is all about covering bureaucratic ass and nothing to do with what is right. The Tories need to step in and put a stop to this poste haste. They didn’t create this mess or condone the cause of it. But by allowing it to proceed, they appear to be in agreement with the process. And that is very, very wrong.

Leo Knight
primetimecrime@gmail.com

Justice failed

I'm stunned. I have seen all manner of stupidity and hand-wringing social engineering nonsense coming from our courts in Canada, but nothing I had previously seen prepared me for the blatent nonsense which emanated from the BC Court of Appeal in the case of American accused murderer Vernon Maurice Walker.

Walker is accused of shooting a man in a Seattle alley in June , 2005. A witness picked him from a photo array of six individuals. But this identification wasn't good enough for Mr. Justice Ian Donald. Unbelieveably, he actually believes it was his duty to pontificate on the legitimacy of the photo identification and decided to release this 'alleged' murderer.

Walker came to Canada betting on the lenient criminal justice system in the hope that he would be able to hide from American justice after 'allegedly' committing a murder. And, just to prove his intentions were well-placed, Mr. Justice Donald gave credence to him with his flagrantly stupid judgement.

Yes, stupid. For I cannot fathom what great leap of mental gymnastics could possibly lead the supposedly learned judge to reach the conclusion that an eyewitness is not good enough to meet the test of whether there is a case to be met in the jurisdiction the murder was committed.

And that is the point. It is not within the purview of Mr. Justice Donald to determine guilt or innocence. But rather, it was his duty to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to have the individual placed before a court in the jurisdiction preferring the prosecution. In this case Seattle, not Moscow or Beijing. Seattle, in the state of Washington, in the United States of America. You know, in the cradle of democracy where individual rights trump everything. The place that sets the standard for the rest of the Western world.

And it was in that duty that Mr. Justice Donald failed and failed miserably.

And it is in that failure that he has put to risk another life because as sure as God made little green apples, Walker will not change his past behaviour, alleged though it may be, and become a God fearing, contributing member of our society. No, I'm willing to participate in any betting pool on when Walker will be arrested again.

One can only hope that the next person who falls victim to Walker won't be someone near and dear to me or thee.

Leo Knight

leo@primetimecrime.com

A systemic murder

Another senseless murder of an innocent person committed by someone who should not have been on the streets but for a weak, broken justice system.

Yesterday, police in Calgary charged Christopher James Watcheston, 21, with the murder of Arcelie Laoagan, a 41 year old mother of five whose battered body was found a week ago near a public transit station. He was on bail at the time of the murder.

Lawyer and justice commentator Scott Newark had this to say in an email about this case. It's worth sharing:

************************************************************

So let's see.....guy gets charged with three assaults and doesn't make bail for a couple of weeks. That suggests maybe a history not revealed in story. Shortly after release he commits more crimes...while on bail which is literally a promise he wouldn't commit more crimes if court released him from charges of first set of crimes...but again he is released on bail and now charged in this murder.

A) We should be keeping track of this "profile" because quite literally the state had the capacity to have prevented this crime by taking notice of his continuing criminality but chose....consciously...to let him go...again....and take a chance...again....

B) There is a need for a review of the circumstances of the release of this person independent of the criminal trial. Did the Crown seek revocation of the original bail and oppose his release. If not, why not? Did the JP or provincial court judge reject such requests and order the release? Did someone say they would serve as a surety to enforce the deceptively described "house arrest".

What's needed is literally an examination of how the means of death came to be in a position to inflict death. These used to be done in Ontario by Coroner's Inquest and we recommended an amendment to the Coroner's Act (akin to when an inmate dies in custody) requiring an inquest when the person that unlawfully kills was released from lawful custody by the state and the amendment also stipulated that the releasing authority...including a judge or JP...is a compellable witness. There may be nothing "systemic" about this case but we'll never know if no one asks.

The justice system is about to go into 'we can't talk about it' mode supposedly to protect the accused's right to a fair trial. Co-incidentally it also helps cover the system's ass which is at least partially why these kinds of obviously preventable crimes keep occurring.

*************************************************************

Scott's last point is critical. The blatent nonsense so often used by elements in the justice system about why they cannot talk about their incompetence and ineffectiveness protects the system much more than the rights of an accused. That, perhaps, needs to get addressed before much can be done about a fundamentally broken justice system.

Leo Knight
leo@primetimecrime.com