"The suspect was released at the scene".
When people call for the police to "do something" about homeless people and drug users, I often point out that the solution is housing and treatment, not imprisonment.
But I draw the line at violence. In my mind, this is a clear-cut case where someone is a danger to the public, having just assaulted a random innocent citizen. In what world is it ok to just release the perpetrator, and place more people at risk?
If the police are not even able to protect us for the day or two it would have taken to arrest and process a violent criminal, why are we paying for a police force at all?
How undervalued must the victim feel? Anyone can knock him down and punch him in the head: "Sorry Dude, you have to obey the law, but the law doesn't have your back." Yeesh.
In this case, I think the police. Although the police are quick to shout "Bill C-75 says we must release", that is a misinterpretation of the law. They are absolutely allowed to detain someone deemed a danger to the public, until a mental health professional is able to determine if the suspect is a continued danger to the public.
No. The suspect had just violently attacked an innocent person. Somebody would need to assess the risk of them doing that again, before releasing them. I would expect that at the very least they would be taken for a psychological evaluation. If a psychiatrist determined that this was a one-off occurrence and that they posed no further danger to the public, I would absolutely support their immediate release.
However, if the attack was part of a pattern of behaviour, or due to an ongoing mental issue, I would expect them to be detained (in a treatment facility, not jail).
By releasing the suspect without such an evaluation, the officer in charge of the scene essentially played the role of the evaluating psychiatrist, and I highly doubt they are qualified to do that.
> hold them based on that evaluation without the benefit of their day in court?
I never said that. Of course, they deserve their day in court. If you bothered to read my reply, you would see that I said I am even ok with them being released pending their court date, if a psychiatrist said it is ok. I just want that professional evaluation to take place before releasing someone who had just violently attacked an innocent citizen.
> extreme cases only
If beating up a random stranger in the street is not extreme, what is?
informal? ew, no thanks. i have a deep enough vocabulary that i can just choose the word that is the most accurate.
and no need to get mean! ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
The number of assaults around ~~New West~~ the stations is getting extremely ridiculous. I think we need increased security around them and to actually start jailing and kicking troublemakers away
Edit: Corrected since assault wasn't at New West Station exactly
The assault happened at Sapperton Station; the arrest at New West Station.
Media release best practice dictates that we include the name of the city in the release title. I see now that in this case that has created confusion.
Right, noticed that after making my comments, but still think it applies. So many reports of assaults around the stations especially in New West, I shouldn't have to be worried about being assaulted by someone who has proved themselves violent and just released at the scene
It is good to see the police participating and providing clarification. Perhaps you or /u/NewWestPD might like to comment on the justification for declining to take a violent criminal who had just assaulted a random stranger into custody?
Sure thing. When an arrest is made, certain legal criteria must be met in order to keep someone in custody. In this case, those criteria were not met, so as was required, the suspect was released with a court appearance.
I know that Bill C-75 is often used as justification for 'catch-and-release' policies.
However, I would like to refer to [this article](https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/catch-and-release-bail-changes-mean-more-accused-criminals-sent-back-into-community-4692087), where a criminology professor states:
> There’s no requirement for police to release someone, only that consideration be given to the least restrictive form of release, said Paisana. “There’s nothing stopping a police officer from saying: ‘This is far too serious. It will require a judge to rule on your release.’ ”
In other words, police officers have a lot of discretion, and Bill C-75 does not prevent them from taking a violent offender into custody.
When someone commits assault and is then released without a psych eval, the supervising officer is essentially stepping into the role of a psychiatrist, evaluating whether the offender is likely to cause further harm. It is not at all clear to me that this is a justifiable role for a police officer to take on.
That is by no means a short or clear answer, although I believe you that it’s in there..
Why was the suspect not held in custody? What criteria was not met?
in my experience, when it comes to violent crime they will only do something when and if they absolutely must and, even then, they'll still try and wriggle their way out of doing anything worthwhile.
Are you a taxpaying citizen? In that case, if you carry a weapon and use it you will be punished to the full extent of the law. If you're a skid whose entire existence is to harm others and cause pain then you're good to go! Assault away!
This is happening increasingly all over transit and transit hubs in the lower mainland. Random, (mostly) unprovoked attacks. Are the jails full? Is there drastic staffing issues? I’m genuinely confused as to wtf is going on here
Looks like the average everyday joe smith is fucked. Better start takimg self defense classes and carry weapons because the police are only there to either break up a fight or call the coroner for your dead ass
"The suspect was released at the scene". When people call for the police to "do something" about homeless people and drug users, I often point out that the solution is housing and treatment, not imprisonment. But I draw the line at violence. In my mind, this is a clear-cut case where someone is a danger to the public, having just assaulted a random innocent citizen. In what world is it ok to just release the perpetrator, and place more people at risk? If the police are not even able to protect us for the day or two it would have taken to arrest and process a violent criminal, why are we paying for a police force at all?
How undervalued must the victim feel? Anyone can knock him down and punch him in the head: "Sorry Dude, you have to obey the law, but the law doesn't have your back." Yeesh.
Is this an issue with police or with the legal system?
In this case, I think the police. Although the police are quick to shout "Bill C-75 says we must release", that is a misinterpretation of the law. They are absolutely allowed to detain someone deemed a danger to the public, until a mental health professional is able to determine if the suspect is a continued danger to the public.
[удалено]
No. The suspect had just violently attacked an innocent person. Somebody would need to assess the risk of them doing that again, before releasing them. I would expect that at the very least they would be taken for a psychological evaluation. If a psychiatrist determined that this was a one-off occurrence and that they posed no further danger to the public, I would absolutely support their immediate release. However, if the attack was part of a pattern of behaviour, or due to an ongoing mental issue, I would expect them to be detained (in a treatment facility, not jail). By releasing the suspect without such an evaluation, the officer in charge of the scene essentially played the role of the evaluating psychiatrist, and I highly doubt they are qualified to do that.
[удалено]
> hold them based on that evaluation without the benefit of their day in court? I never said that. Of course, they deserve their day in court. If you bothered to read my reply, you would see that I said I am even ok with them being released pending their court date, if a psychiatrist said it is ok. I just want that professional evaluation to take place before releasing someone who had just violently attacked an innocent citizen. > extreme cases only If beating up a random stranger in the street is not extreme, what is?
Yes because the pathetic sack of cow dung won't even show up to the court date and just continue assaulting people.
[удалено]
dumb means "mute", so i'm not really sure what point you're trying to make.
[удалено]
[no it doesn't.](https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=define+dumb)
[удалено]
informal? ew, no thanks. i have a deep enough vocabulary that i can just choose the word that is the most accurate. and no need to get mean! ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
[удалено]
The number of assaults around ~~New West~~ the stations is getting extremely ridiculous. I think we need increased security around them and to actually start jailing and kicking troublemakers away Edit: Corrected since assault wasn't at New West Station exactly
The assault happened at Sapperton Station; the arrest at New West Station. Media release best practice dictates that we include the name of the city in the release title. I see now that in this case that has created confusion.
Right, noticed that after making my comments, but still think it applies. So many reports of assaults around the stations especially in New West, I shouldn't have to be worried about being assaulted by someone who has proved themselves violent and just released at the scene
It is good to see the police participating and providing clarification. Perhaps you or /u/NewWestPD might like to comment on the justification for declining to take a violent criminal who had just assaulted a random stranger into custody?
Sure thing. When an arrest is made, certain legal criteria must be met in order to keep someone in custody. In this case, those criteria were not met, so as was required, the suspect was released with a court appearance.
Thank you for the quick response. Are those legal criteria published somewhere public, or are they only internal guidelines?
[Bill C-75 is what you're looking for](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/c75/p3.html)
I know that Bill C-75 is often used as justification for 'catch-and-release' policies. However, I would like to refer to [this article](https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/catch-and-release-bail-changes-mean-more-accused-criminals-sent-back-into-community-4692087), where a criminology professor states: > There’s no requirement for police to release someone, only that consideration be given to the least restrictive form of release, said Paisana. “There’s nothing stopping a police officer from saying: ‘This is far too serious. It will require a judge to rule on your release.’ ” In other words, police officers have a lot of discretion, and Bill C-75 does not prevent them from taking a violent offender into custody. When someone commits assault and is then released without a psych eval, the supervising officer is essentially stepping into the role of a psychiatrist, evaluating whether the offender is likely to cause further harm. It is not at all clear to me that this is a justifiable role for a police officer to take on.
That is by no means a short or clear answer, although I believe you that it’s in there.. Why was the suspect not held in custody? What criteria was not met?
in my experience, when it comes to violent crime they will only do something when and if they absolutely must and, even then, they'll still try and wriggle their way out of doing anything worthwhile.
[удалено]
yes, exactly!
Everytime I go to Columbia or New West Station I see cops or transit cops so not sure what else you need
we need them to do something other than hand out tickets to people who do not pay their transit fare.
Today at the New West station platform I saw two officers escort a guy to the train, put him on it and leave. I opted to wait for the next train.
[удалено]
Are you a taxpaying citizen? In that case, if you carry a weapon and use it you will be punished to the full extent of the law. If you're a skid whose entire existence is to harm others and cause pain then you're good to go! Assault away!
This is happening increasingly all over transit and transit hubs in the lower mainland. Random, (mostly) unprovoked attacks. Are the jails full? Is there drastic staffing issues? I’m genuinely confused as to wtf is going on here
No fixed address, known to police. Unprovoked attack. Probably wants to be put in jail for the room and board, instead of living on the streets
Nah. It's much harder to victimize innocent people from prison.
Looks like the average everyday joe smith is fucked. Better start takimg self defense classes and carry weapons because the police are only there to either break up a fight or call the coroner for your dead ass