Guilty until proven innocent?

[Anonymous]

Police state up in here.  "When somebody has demonstrated their lack of respect for Canadian law, we do have the right to expect them to be put away,"

For illegally owning a gun.  Don't expect any militia from us Canadians LOL.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

http://www.lethbridgeherald.com/article_11569.php
By The Canadian Press
Aug 5, 2008, 04:23

OTTAWA — A Montreal court may be about to make Canadian legal history in a case that could see offenders considered guilty until proved innocent.
A bail hearing at the court this week is believed to be the first involving so-called "reverse onus," in which a defendant must prove why they deserve less time behind bars and why they should be released on bail pending trial.
The controversial new amendment to the Criminal Code is part of the Tackling Violent Crime Act, introduced by the Harper government as part of its get-tough-on-crime policy. The law took effect in May.
On Thursday, a dozen alleged members of the Crips street gang face a bail hearing after being charged last week with illegal possession of firearms.
Crown prosecutor David Simon said the hearing will likely be postponed a few weeks, leaving him more time to get used to playing by the new rules — and to use them to his advantage.
"(This) new legislation gives me more leverage," he said.
But he cautioned the amendment is still new and "with respect to the bail hearing, it's still subject to interpretation."
Defence lawyer Marion Burelle believes the reverse onus rule should be reserved for more serious offences than gun possession.
"It's sure that this new provision is (intended) to reduce street crime," Burelle said.
But he noted the case is "not about the use of arms but about possession."
Fellow defence attorney Tom Pentefountas said reverse onus and other measures, like mandatory minimum sentences, take away discretionary powers and the use of "good judgment" from judges.
"I wouldn't be happy if I were a judge," he said.
Irvin Waller, director of the Institute for the Prevention of Crime at the University of Ottawa, wants to see the federal government focus on preventative measures as opposed to more harsh disciplinary action, especially since occurrence of gun crimes in Canada has remained consistent.
"The first thing we need is a national strategy to reduce violent crime," Waller said.
In response to the reverse onus, Waller said he does not want to see Canada "limit its main response to violence to reacting to it after it has happened."
Alan Young, a professor of criminal law at York University's Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto, has called the reverse onus a "short-term solution."
"Without the long-term vision there will be other dangerous people to step into the shoes of the people who are detained," he told the Toronto Star.
However, Dave Schroder of Edmonton's Guardian Angels network thinks the reverse onus rule is "long overdue."
"When somebody has demonstrated their lack of respect for Canadian law, we do have the right to expect them to be put away," he said.

[K-Sensor]

There's another post on this subject.