Adam's Law Blog

This week I was honoured to be quoted in this story (complete with a professional photograph of me) which appeared on the front page of the Lawyer’s Weekly.  The article, which I was interviewed for back in November, was about private prisons and whether they are something that could be implemented in Canada in the same way that they have become relatively normal in the United States.

I spoke about my concerns from a constitutional perspective.  I explained that offenders who have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment still retain their constitutional rights (subject to reasonable limits) and that it could become a problem for governments (either federal or provincial) to expect private companies to protect these rights on their behalf.  (The Charter only applies to one’s relationship with government, however my interpretation is that this requirement should extend to these, albeit hypothetical, corporations who would be providing a service on behalf of government.  If there are any constitutional scholars who disagree then please post your thoughts as a comment.)

The other issue is that it would be in the best interest of a private company to keep people in prison longer as it would make them more money.  While I’m sure the role of the National Parole Board (who determine whether a federally sentenced offender should be released) would not be privately contracted, any prison company could affect factors that assist an individual in receiving parole such as their participation in programs and prison disciplinary record.

Personally I see private prisons as a bad idea and something that just cannot work within the Canadian legal system and method of corrections.  As the Lawyer’s Weekly story explained, there was an attempt at a private jail in Ontario in 2001.  The 1200 inmate jail closed five years later amid numerous concerns.  Hopefully this was a lesson well learned.

This blog post was written by Toronto Criminal Lawyer Adam Goodman.  Adam can be reached at 416-477-6793 or by email at adam@aglaw.ca.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Today’s Star contained a heartwarming story about a gentleman who was facing serious criminal charges but was given a break when he appeared, seven years ago, before Justice Hugh Atwood for sentencing in Brampton.  Seeing that the man had turned his life around, Atwood sentenced him to a 90-day weekend sentence (he could have given him four years) effectively giving him a chance to continue to turn his life around and to be there for his young son.

Seven years later, in what was clearly a very emotional moment back in a Brampton courtroom, Maxwell Beech appeared again in front of Atwood, however this time he was not facing any criminal charges but instead thanking His Honour for giving him this second chance.

For reasons that defy logic, the Conservative government is ignoring clear warning signs and moving ahead with their crime policy.  This policy will impose mandatory minimum sentences on numerous offences which would effectively take sentencing discretion away from Judges in many cases.  Had their been a mandatory minimum sentence for the charges Beech faced then Atwood’s sentencing hands would have been tied, and perhaps Beech’s story would have turned out vastly different than the one that was told in court yesterday.

I am of course aware that not every person found guilty of a criminal offence turns their life around like Beech has.  Many do end up becoming recidivists.  That said, there is still no evidence to even suggest that harsher punishment actually succeeds in reducing crime.

If anything, the billions of dollars that the crime bill will likely cost the taxpayers would be much better served being put into social and counseling programs that will actually help in reducing the crime rate.

This blog post was written by lawyer Adam Goodman.  Adam is a criminal lawyer in Toronto who blogs regularly about legal subjects.  Adam can be reached at 416-477-6793 or by email at adam@aglaw.ca.

Be Sociable, Share!

•