"He had earlier broken into the same home and allegedly threatened two women with a knife. He was charged and released on a Recognizance"

Holy Crap! They let him go after that?

Yes faxman. Apparently, this is how our justice system works. Rarely do they get any jail time. The Attorney General's office scrapped a piece of legislation that had a zero tolerance for this type of behaviour. Now it is a revolving door. Welcome to hell.
I hope these women use local outreach resources to obtain the support they need.

so I assume by the story that he is still in custody. So to understand how this works, when you threaten someone else with a knife they release you, but if you threaten yourself you will remain in custody. Oh this is a wonderful world we live in

rarely do they get any jail time - listen to yourself.

greatmysticbushape your comment makes no sense. Explain it or stifle yourself.

Commoner: In the first instance, the male would have been arrested for Break and enter and committing the offence of threats with a weapon. (It is not known or stated if there was any kind of relationship between the man and any of the women, but the fact that he returned afterwards, suggests so.)

At any rate, he would be in police custody..since it was the weekend, the police would have had to have a telephone hearing before the Justice of the peace at the Justice centre which is located in burnaby. (Its all done by telephone now).

The police (acting for the crown) may have expressed their wishes to keep the guy in custody pending the outcome of his trial, but some factors (lack of criminal record etc.???) may have led the Justice of the peace to release the guy on a recognizance. He only had a bail hearing not a trial yet, so the aspect of jail time was not at hand.

Since he then violated the terms of his recognizance and was re-arrested and it is still the weekend, he will have another bail hearing and hopefully the Justice of the peace will now remand him for trial...which could take months, in which case he would get time served...

But, you never know what the courts are going to do in terms of his release....

Opps I see it IS a violence in relationship matter as per the previous article.

lmorge: The fact remains that whether it is a domestic violence issue or not, the justice system fails the people it is supposed to protect. The perpetrators of such offences are well aware of how to use the system to their advantage. The trauma that the crime causes its victims goes beyond the event itself. It can be difficult for a victim to regain their sense of safety and faith in humanity after such an event especially when the criminal is not adequately punished.
The repealling of the zero tolerance legislation leaves people vulnerable to further victimization. It also increases the costs associated with policing. What needs to happen is to reintegrate the zero tolerance act, not just for domestic violence issues but all violent offences. There should be mandatory psychiatric evaluation and treatment of the perpetrator. If the offender refuses treatment there should be no possibility of being out on the streets. There are some great programs available for people who have been targets of violence as well as their perpetrators. It is high time those are emphasized and funded adequately. Society would be better off as a result. RCMP would also find that the time spent on the same repetitive cases would be drastically reduced thereby increasing their morale for their valued contributions.

Wouldn't the police put a reswtraining order on him to stay away from the residence? If so, he will be stgaying in prison until trial time for sure (and hopefully for a mighty long time)!!!

DPJ: A restraining order is only a piece of paper. A breach of that order would see him arrested and faced with another trial. At least that has been my experience. And round and round it goes. Usually a fine, a day or two in jail another order, perhaps an order for counselling and probation. It does nothing to solve it unfortunately.
lmorge may be able to shed more light on it as I can only speak from my experience.

He was on a recognizance with conditions to stay away, DPJ. A restraining order is a civil document not associated to a criminal charge.

The guy is charged with Breach of recognizance with additional charges of B&E, Threats with a weapon or possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace etc...on top of the original charges.

With him back in custody, you can bet he won't be getting out anytime soon since there is now reverse onus on him (or his lawyer) to explain to the courts why he should be allowed to be out and about.
Sec 515 or 516 of the criminal code I believe.....is the authority to keep him in the clink.

And commoner, don't get me wrong, I am all for these people to receive their just punishment - none of us police want another incident like what happened in Victoria with the asian family there.

My practise is that if it happens during the week the offender is treated as an in custody court matter and they appear in provincial court the next morning...regardless if I have to remain a couple of hours after work getting the paperwork in. If its the weekend, then by law they have to appear for a bail hearing by phone within 24 hrs or they go free none the less.

So, the police do their job or try to, in getting the accused before the court, but its the court's decision on whether they go free on conditions or remain to stand trial.

The police can only suggest they get counselling, only the courts can order it.... but that is usually after the trial is done.

lmorge: To be clear I never doubted the efforts of the police. What is your opinion on the legislative effectiveness of the courts' on this issue?

we already have the laws why the hell was he released on own recon immeadiately after arrest.
My undeerstanding of article said he was armed - What kind of drugsw were the cops on ?

A certain Mountie constable is 'on the carpet" for his alleged malfeasance for being allegedly related to two deaths. An airport tourist and a motorcyclist right now. Letting this guy with a unregistered knife off the hook just makes sense. Don't want a double standard now, do you? It now seems to me that punishment these days costs money. With all the recent cutbacks all over the news, who needs expensive jails with government standard food, warm beds and taxpayer paid cablevision? Denying those three, cable , warm food and a warm bed to criminals could be construed as a form of punishment after all.

Thankyou lmorge for the insight. You must be a lawyer or a related job. Mabe could give me insight on an immigration question.

And some folks are wondering why elite 'members' of the police get to hide behind that wall and fortress at 22nd & Quinn. Now you know, it is to protect them from the slimeballs that they bust who don't spend any or much time in jail.
metalman.

Brain2: Don't bash the police. They did their job. If the suspect was released by a Justice of the PEace after his bail hearing then he was released by the court.
Although I'm not privy to the exact circumstances of his release, he could have been released with sureties or not..since he breached his conditions he would forfeit the bond and go back to jail hopefully until the case/trial is concluded.
And, DPJ no I am not a lawyer. ( I keep my hands in my own pockets) Bad joke, I know. Immigration question: sure...ask away

22nd & Quinn St. is designed to "keep the good guys safe from the bad guys". I quote.

I heard of bullet proof glass, steel plate in all of the walls, rebar through all of the concrete pouring and a mental breakdown in all of there additional areas of intest.