The judge used the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to protect some guys with 12 crack rocks, a loaded, high-powered handgun and about $1,700 cash in their car.
She scolded the officer who confiscated the goods and set the other guys free. I'm figuring, at this rate, she might as well also have returned their gun, drugs and cash.
It's obvious that judge rendered justice in the cloistered environs of a courtroom, very far from the mean streets of the West End.
Would that judge be as convinced of the "rights" of those guys if she suspected them of selling drugs to a member of her family?
Would it make a difference if she knew the parents whose kids would be the recipients of those crack rocks or possibly even one of the bullets from that loaded gun?
Would she still scold the cop?
Back in the neighbourhood, it seems that the courts spend more time defending crooks with the charter than defending our community from the crooks. Presumption of innocence has turned into a denial of obvious guilt.
Hoodlums don't give a rip about our charter rights, but they'll quickly duck behind their own charter rights when it suits them.
If most citizens knew how hard it is to convict someone in court they'd be sick!
I regularly get calls from others in my neighbourhood complaining about obvious drug houses. The steady procession of bicycle couriers, cars, cabs, and strung-out addicts make it painfully obvious what's happening. Neighbours constantly see money and small packages changing hands on a regular basis. They live with the noise, the traffic, and the fear.
So they call the cops. But they falsely assume that cops will be able to move quickly to bust the dealers. Cops know the tell-tale signs even better than most of us. But they also know that there's a huge difference between knowing that people are doing something illegal and proving it in court.
I was reviewing this ongoing frustration with someone in the neighbourhood this week. And I think I finally understand the problem. I've often seen that statue representing justice. It's the one where the blindfolded lady is holding the scales of justice.
Maybe judges have misunderstood the statue. I'm sure the artist intended the blindfold to encourage the rendering of impartial judgment, not the denial of reality on the streets.
I'm thinking some judges ought to remove the blinders on occasion and take a closer look at what's going on out here.
Maybe they can remove their blindfold long enough to strap on their "Charter" and come live in our neighbourhood for awhile.
In my neighbourhood the charter is used to cloak the crooks and handcuff the cops.
In my neighbourhood the charter is abused daily by the same guys the judge defends when they finally arrive in court.
There's nothing wrong with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But there's something wrong about the vacuum in which it's applied and the way it seemingly shields obvious criminals, drug dealers and outright thugs.
I guess it's all a matter of context.
I took a quick look at the charter, and I'm grateful my kids didn't have a copy of this document when they were younger.
If the charter applied to parenting:
n I've occasionally violated their freedom to peaceful assembly with some friends;
n I've sometimes curtailed their freedom of association ("not while you're under this roof");
n I've infringed on their rights of mobility ("you're grounded");
n I've not provided explanations of house rules in both official languages;
n I've conducted what some might consider unreasonable search or seizure;
n I'm sure they may sometimes have complained that my punishment was cruel and unusual -- despite the fact that it was a plain ordinary spanking;
n I've used incriminating evidence from one "offence" to bolster concerns on other issues;
n I've commonly deprived them of their rights to "counsel," bail or a jury of their peers.
Don't get me wrong! I've got real good kids.
But I don't think they'd have turned out this way if I blindly applied the Charter of Rights and Freedoms without due consideration of our context; without an equal expectation of respect and responsibility.
I was thinking of offering that judge an apartment in our neighbourhood for awhile. A change of context might be helpful. Actually, it might help if all judges got their noses out of the charter long enough to smell the fear and mess on our streets.
To be fair, that judge has also made some good decisions. I've witnessed her administer a balance of justice and mercy in a context of common sense. But this time her decision was whacked. I hope she does better next time.
Back to my kids, I know sometimes they read this column. It leads me to wonder if there's a statute of limitations on charter violations. I'm wondering what would happen if they called and asked the courts to address my past charter violations.
If the courts don't consider the context, I'm sure I could be in trouble.
If I get that same judge, she may just lock me up and throw away the key.
Rev. Harry Lehotsky
514 Maryland Street
Winnipeg, Mb R3G 1M5
(204) 775-4929
lehotsky@escape.ca