WilliesStache14 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/06/aboriginal-stanley-cup-riot-lighter-sentence/ A B.C. Aboriginal woman charged with three counts from the 2011 Stanley Cup Riot was handed down a lighter sentence Wednesday in part due to her Aboriginal heritage. Dawn Michelle Vanichuk, 27, was charged in 2013 with one count of taking part in a riot, one count of assault causing bodily harm and one count of breaking and entering with the intent to commit an indictable offence after police published photos of her taking part in the 2011 Stanley Cup Riot on June 15, 2011. During the riot, Vanichuk took the leg of a table and hit a female “Good Samaritan” in the face after the victim tried to stop the vandalism on Seymour Street. She was then seen breaking into the Hudson’s Bay and stealing a purse. Vanichuk reportedly sought help for addiction in 2013 and Judge Harris gave her credit for her ability to turn her life around, also stating that she was a “first time aboriginal offender” and thus deserved a lighter sentence. Section 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code of Canada states: “All available sanctions or options other than imprisonment that are reasonable in the circumstances should be considered for all offenders, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders.” This sub-section of the Criminal Code is in place because Aboriginals are “victims of systemic and direct discrimination [suffering] the legacy of dislocation, and are affected by poor social and economic conditions.” According to CBC, Vanichuk could have faced up to 10 years in prison for her actions but was instead was given a suspended sentence and 16 months of probation, handed down by Judge Reginald Harris in the Provincial Court. CBC also notes that Judge Harris referred to the recent Truth and Reconciliation Report depicting years of “cultural genocide” as well as Vanichuk’s “broken, addicted family” as reasons why the defendant is also a victim of abuse. This is a bit ridiculous sorry, anyone that participated is as guilty as anyone else that did whether you are white, aboriginal, asian, black etc. "Affected by poor social and economic conditions"...and non-aborignal criminals aren't? pretty sure that's how most criminals end up as criminals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squamfan Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 why do natives get off for free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*VaNcOuVeRCaNuCkS* Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 why do natives get off for free Geez don't you know, they were here first We have to bow down to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I would look more into the whole story. While the native bit did factor in, the women who was hit in the face said this is exactly what she wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Geez don't you know, they were here first We have to bow down to them I thought it was someone else.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 why do natives get off for free Cuz equality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 why do natives get off for free Yeah what did white people ever do to them anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edlerberry Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 disgusting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Reverse discrimination at its finest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Sends a good message. Well done justice system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 "Affected by poor social and economic conditions"...and non-aborignal criminals aren't? pretty sure that's how most criminals end up as criminals. True dat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 why do natives get off for free That's funny. They don't. This is just a stupid judgement and this will inflame the masses to make comments like "Why do natives always get off for free" But hey, they really don't. Check the stats for criminalization, poverty, addiction, suicide, education and imprisonment. You'll see first nations individuals lead those categories in all negative aspects. This judge is an idiot and now we're going to be subjected to a few days of intelligent comments like the following one Geez don't you know, they were here first We have to bow down to them Yup. Bow down. Sure. I can see this thread will in no way shape or form degenerate in to near racist digs and pathetic jabs at crap people don't understand at all. Simply because the optics in a stupid judgement are wrong. This is a stupid ruling and she deserved some serious jail time regardless of what the person she attacked said and regardless of her skin colour. Crimes are crimes But ignorance seems to be commonplace regardless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 That's ridiculous. Doesn't matter if your white, black, aboriginal, gay, straight, handicapped or other. A crime is a crime and everyone should be punished equally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 That's ridiculous. Doesn't matter if your white, black, aboriginal, gay, straight, handicapped or other. A crime is a crime and everyone should be punished equally. Really? That's quite a sweeping generalization. - So a poor single mother caught stealing to try to feed her kid should be punished the same as anyone else who steals? - A man driving his pregnant wife to the hospital should get the same fine as anyone else who is speeding? A crime can be an example of greed and disrespect by an individual fully aware of such, in which case it should be judged harshly. The punishment should demonstrate that such behaviour will not be tolerated, and give the perpetrator (and any other logical person considering doing the same) a substantial deterrent for offending in the future. But in reality, there are a multitude of other circumstances that can affect a person's judgement and drive them to criminal behaviour. Most people recognize that a child should not be charged the same as an adult, because they don't have the mental and emotional makeup to take full responsibility for their actions. And yet, a person subjected to years of abuse may in fact be more like a child than a fully-functioning adult. Then there's a whole other angle of what a sentence should really be accomplishing. Is incarcerating a girl subjected to abuse, who for the first time lashed out with a grave error, yet really wants to change and is willing to take steps to do so, really in the best interest of anyone? Will locking her up with hardened criminals for years make her a better contributor to society? This girl isn't getting off easy 'because of her native heritage' - she's simply having her circumstances realized and used to shape her sentence. And, unfortunately, abuse is a common circumstance among Native communities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Tortorella Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Keep waking up canada. We will be fair and just one day. One day anyone with a canadian citizen is held at same level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 This story is going to get blown out of proportion because CBC purposefully chose to present just the right amount of detail to get people pissed off, but not enough detail to understand the decision. S. 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code REQUIRES the judge to consider the individual's aboriginal heritage as part of their sentencing decision. The law is not "you must give an Aboriginal person a lighter sentence". The judge could have given the offender a sentence equal to that of a white person. The purpose of the law is to ensure that things like systemic abuse, alcoholism, poverty, etc., in the family of origin are taken into consideration. Guess what? The same factors are also considered mitigating factors for a white person, a black person, an Asian person, etc. If a white person who commits a crime comes from a family background characterized by systemic abuse and poverty, these circumstances will likely be considered mitigating factors at sentencing. The law is simply meant to enforce judge's consideration of Aboriginal-specific mitigating factors. EDIT; BUT, if a judge isn't very articulate, or lazy, s/he may simply decide to award a more lenient sentence simply because of skin colour. This is not the purpose of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 That's ridiculous. Doesn't matter if your white, black, aboriginal, gay, straight, handicapped or other. A crime is a crime and everyone should be punished equally. What if one person has a severe mental disorder and the other person had greater control over their actions? Should they bear the same responsibility? What if one person was born FASD? Through no decision of their own they spend life with very poor executive functioning. Should they be sentenced the same way as say, a gang member? Should we punish the 14 year old, whose brain will require another 10 years to fully mature, the same way we punish a 40 year old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown33429 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 That's ridiculous. Doesn't matter if your white, black, aboriginal, gay, straight, handicapped or other. A crime is a crime and everyone should be punished equally. The purpose of the justice system isn't just punishment. Other important goals include rehabilitation, and deterrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamHomer Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Yeah what did white people ever do to them anyways? I really don't get this argument. So I can do $&!# if my ancestors were persecuted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felixthecat_potvin Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I really don't get this argument. So I can do crap if my ancestors were persecuted? My family is Ukrainian- Jewish, guess I can go to Germany and steal a bunch of things because they were persecuted in 1941. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.