Dangerous offender status for Deaf repeat sex offender

Jiro said:
O_O

what a sick man... he must be doing this out of mockery...
Click to expand...

Yes obviously. He is going to be in prison for a long time because he is labeled as a dangerous offender.

In Canada, we have had a unique and special law called a dangerous offender clause and it applies to serial murderers, rapists and culprits who commit very serious criminal offenses. The federal court determines whether or not the serious offenders are given a status of dangerous offender on request of the crown prosecutor.

Marc Lecuyer is the first Deaf person that becomes a dangerous offender in our history.
 
Jiro said:
accused? I dunno about you but 6-times offender? SIX times? Definitely not an accusation in this case.

I'm all about fair trial and all but a repeated offender as bad as this guy? Enough is enough. Too bad Ottawa doesn't have "3 Strike Law" :aw:
Click to expand...

Until one is proven guilty through a trial, one is accused.

The other charges have nothing to do with this charge. He was tried on the other charges indivudually and a verdict was found. Same with this.

You are entering a very dangerous position when you automatically assume that someone is guilty of anything simply because they did it before.:cool2: Thank God the justice system protects against that type of thinking.
 
Royale said:
Yes obviously. He is going to be in prison for a long time because he is labeled as a dangerous offender.

In Canada, we have had a unique and special law called a dangerous offender clause and it applies to serial murderers, rapists and culprits who commit very serious criminal offenses. The federal court determines whether or not the serious offenders are given a status of dangerous offender on request of the crown prosecutor.

Marc Lecuyer is the first Deaf person that becomes a dangerous offender in our history.
Click to expand...

We have the same "dangerous offender" clause here, too.
 
I don't know all the variables involved in this courtroom case. I don't know how long each court session has been running, or if any other parties to the case are deaf.

Generally, at least two terps should be in the courtroom during the trial so they can team terp. Most courtroom sessions last more than two hours, so that's a must.

If any of the witnesses, jurors, or accusers are deaf, then they may require additional terps than what the defendant is using.

Some lawyers prefer to use additional terps to verify for themselves what's being interpreted.

The defendant might be also be using additional terps other than the courtroom terps for his consultations with his lawyers and mental health interviews.

Those are just some possibilities.
 
Reba said:
I don't know all the variables involved in this courtroom case. I don't know how long each court session has been running, or if any other parties to the case are deaf.

Generally, at least two terps should be in the courtroom during the trial so they can team terp. Most courtroom sessions last more than two hours, so that's a must.

If any of the witnesses, jurors, or accusers are deaf, then they may require additional terps than what the defendant is using.

Some lawyers prefer to use additional terps to verify for themselves what's being interpreted.

The defendant might be also be using additional terps other than the courtroom terps for his consultations with his lawyers and mental health interviews.

Those are just some possibilities.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I was simply thinking of terping the proceedings for the defendent.
 
I can do a follow up on a few of your questions with my friend who interpreted during that trial and I am sure she will be happy to answer them. Of course I cannot ask her for details due to code of ethics.
 
Reba said:
I don't know all the variables involved in this courtroom case. I don't know how long each court session has been running, or if any other parties to the case are deaf.

Generally, at least two terps should be in the courtroom during the trial so they can team terp. Most courtroom sessions last more than two hours, so that's a must.

If any of the witnesses, jurors, or accusers are deaf, then they may require additional terps than what the defendant is using.

Some lawyers prefer to use additional terps to verify for themselves what's being interpreted.

The defendant might be also be using additional terps other than the courtroom terps for his consultations with his lawyers and mental health interviews.

Those are just some possibilities.
Click to expand...

Yeah possibly.
 
Reba said:
I don't know all the variables involved in this courtroom case. I don't know how long each court session has been running, or if any other parties to the case are deaf.

Generally, at least two terps should be in the courtroom during the trial so they can team terp. Most courtroom sessions last more than two hours, so that's a must.

If any of the witnesses, jurors, or accusers are deaf, then they may require additional terps than what the defendant is using.

Some lawyers prefer to use additional terps to verify for themselves what's being interpreted.

The defendant might be also be using additional terps other than the courtroom terps for his consultations with his lawyers and mental health interviews.

Those are just some possibilities.
Click to expand...

I thought so.
 
jillio said:
Until one is proven guilty through a trial, one is accused.

The other charges have nothing to do with this charge. He was tried on the other charges indivudually and a verdict was found. Same with this.

You are entering a very dangerous position when you automatically assume that someone is guilty of anything simply because they did it before.:cool2: Thank God the justice system protects against that type of thinking.
Click to expand...
Don't panic in here! It's just a wishful thinking :)
 
Jiro said:
I did with :aw: emoticon

:D
Click to expand...

After the fact.:cool2:

But now we all know that Jiro is not really in favor of removing those rights that help insure that we actually put guilty people, and not innocent people, in jail. God knows even with those protections in place, too many mistakes are being made.
 
Canadian Heritage - Section 7-14 : Legal Rights

For your reference...

Section 14

A party or witness in any proceedings who does not understand or speak the language in which the proceedings are conducted or who is deaf has the right to the assistance of an interpreter.

Persons who are deaf or do not understand or speak the language being spoken in court have the right to be assisted by an interpreter. This right applies regardless of which language is involved.
Click to expand...
 
I just remembered another possibility.

If the defendant isn't fluent in formal sign language, then he might require team interpreting with a certified deaf interpreter included. That adds to the terp manpower needs.
 
Back
Top