There is a violent offender on the loose in Winnipeg -- and police are powerless to do anything about it.
Although his identity is known, this individual has plagued the police and the community for years. Since 2013, he has been dealt with by police on a whopping 22 occasions. Over this time, he is alleged to have committed a plethora of criminal acts. They include arson, car theft, drug possession, robbery, break-and-enter, uttering threats, assault and, most recently and perhaps most disturbingly, a near-fatal stabbing. It is a laundry list of serious criminal behaviour that warrants severe legal action.
To date, however, he has not faced any consequences for his behaviour. He is free to remain in the community. He has not been arrested. He has not been charged with any crimes. He has not even spent a night in jail.
Why? Because he is a 10-year-old boy, and under the law, he is too young to be charged.
Criminal law, as it relates to young offenders in this country, is governed by the Youth Criminal Justice Act. It dictates the minimum age of criminal culpability in this country, which is 12. This means that an individual must be at least 12 years of age before he or she may be charged with a criminal offence of any nature. This is higher than it is both the U.S. and England, where the minimum age of criminal culpability are, respectively, seven and 10.
Thirty-three years ago, the law in Canada was different. Children as young as seven could be held criminally responsible for their actions. In 1983, that changed. The age of criminal culpability was raised to what it is today.
A young offender under the age of 12 may, theoretically, commit any criminal act imaginable under the protection of the law and free from consequence.
Although the new law was controversial at the time, it was ultimately passed with the rationale that 12 years, rather than seven, is an age of more moral maturity. It was generally accepted as the age when children can first understand and process complex moral and ethical issues. The law assumes that children under the age of 12 cannot appreciate the gravity of their actions or the consequences that may flow therefrom.
The bottom line is that, as it stands today, a young offender under the age of 12 may, theoretically, commit any criminal act imaginable under the protection of the law and free from consequence.
The only mechanism by which officials may deal with a young offender under 12 is through provincial guidelines. In many provinces, these guidelines are often highly restricted and grossly inadequate, as they cannot restrict the liberty of the child, force the child to participate in his or her own rehabilitation or obtain psychological treatment for any meaningful length of time.
This is a scary prospect.
Thankfully, violent, young offenders under 12 are extremely rare.
But they are not unheard of.
In 2013, the inadequacy of the law around young offenders was tragically illustrated in the case of a six-year-old Saskatchewan boy who was murdered by another boy under the age of 12. Although details of the crime are largely protected, it was widely reported that the murderer was a young boy who had been well-known to police for a long period of time, mainly due to his notorious propensity for violence. His young age, however, prohibited any police intervention beyond issuing him simple cautions. The criminal justice system was unable to intervene, at any stage prior to, or even after, the murder.
They are vulnerable, young, impressionable and on a bad path. They need help - and they need it sooner than later.
As one can imagine, the sense of public outrage in cases like these is overwhelming. People are left feeling confused, frustrated and forsaken by the judicial system... and the sad reality is that they are.
When the hands of justice are tied, the victims of crime, the community at large and even the young offenders themselves suffer considerably more than they should. After all, the criminal justice system works not only by punishing offenders, but also by intervening and rehabilitating offenders before it is too late.
The preamble to the Youth Criminal Justice Act acknowledges this fact.
It declares that society has a responsibility to address the developmental challenges and needs of young people, and that the justice system must work in partnership with communities and families in order to prevent youth crime. It seeks to do this by addressing underlying causes of youth crime, responding to youth needs, and providing support and guidance. It does not seek to lock young offenders up and throw away the key. It seeks to provide prevention, intervention and instruction for those who need it.
This is a principled and noble mission. Its downfall, however, is that it only applies to a portion of the population, while forsaking others due to their age.
Arguably, the youngest of the young offenders are most often the ones who are most in need. These children tend to come from at-risk families with low incomes and poor support networks. They are more likely to drop-out of school and engage in substance abuse. They are vulnerable, young, impressionable and on a bad path. They need help -- and they need it sooner than later.
The sad reality is that as it stands today, our criminal justice system is unequipped to intervene.
It appears that the only option for Winnipeg law enforcement is to continuing issuing cautions to the boy until he turns 12, at which point he will be under the fold of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
Let's just hope that his 12th birthday won't come too late.
Follow HuffPost Canada Blogs on Facebook
MORE ON HUFFPOST:
CONVICTED FOR: Child Sex Abuse AGE ON CONVICTION: 19 AGE ON RELEASE: 54 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 35 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: In 1974 James Bain was convicted of the rape of a nine-year-old boy in Lake Wales, Florida. Bain's photo made its way into a police ID lineup based on a relative of the victim saying the boys description of the attacker sounded like him. The boy picked his photo and he was convicted on little else. He had no previous convictions and insisted he was at home with his sister watching TV at the time of the attack. There was little other evidence other than the photo lineup yet he was found guilty. In 2005 the Innocence Project took up his case and DNA evidence finally proved he didn't commit the crime in 2009. COMPENSATION: $1.75 million NOTES Bain's 35 years in jail is the longest time spent by someone later exonerated through DNA evidence.
CONVICTED FOR: Child Sex Abuse AGE ON CONVICTION: 18 AGE ON RELEASE: 44 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 21 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: In the 1980s, a notorious case of child sex abuse spawned a period of hysteria for years after in which many people were wrongly convicted of the abuse of minors. Baran, an openly gay high school dropout was one of them. He was working at the Early Childhood Development Center in Pittsfield, Massachusetts when he was arrested in 1984 on charges of molestation of children in his care. The charges arose after a boy said Baran had "hurt his penis". The month previously the same boy's parents had said he should be fired because he was gay. After news of his arrest broke more than a dozen children came forward with allegations. Baran was convicted of five counts of rape and five counts of indecent assault and battery and was sentenced to three concurrent terms of life in prison. In 2006 a Superior Court Judge found a number of disturbing things wrong with his original trial. - On the day the trial started social workers recommended sexual abuse charges be brought against the boyfriends of the boy's mother, evidence never shared with Baran's lawyers. - Baran’s attorney, Leonard Conway, was found to have not adequately prepared for the trial. - Taped interviews of the children alleged to have been molested by Baran were heavily edited. In one a child was recorded saying: "Where’s my prize? You promised me a prize." His conviction was quashed in 2009. COMPENSATION: $400,000 NOTES During his imprisonment Baran was repeatedly beaten and sexually abused. He died of heart failure in 2014.
CONVICTED FOR: Murder AGE ON CONVICTION: 21 AGE ON RELEASE: 48 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 27 CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: 20-year-old Cathy Trunko was stabbed and killed on January 19, 1980. Five days later Daniel Anderson was being driven to a police station on an unrelated drunken disorderly charge. Police claim he spontaneously confessed to Trunko's murder during the ride. He immediately recanted the confession but was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 55 years. The jury rejected his claims that while sleep-deprived and still drunk - family members said Anderson had been battling alcohol since he was 14 - he was beaten by police and told to confess. Anderson was released on parole in 2007. In 2015 new DNA evidence showed that blood found on the knife belonged to neither Anderson nor Trunko and his charges were dismissed.
CONVICTED FOR: Sexual Assault AGE ON CONVICTION: 18 AGE ON RELEASE: 33 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 15 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: In 1982 Marvin Anderson was sentenced to 210 years in jail for robbery, forcible sodomy, abduction, and two counts of rape relating to the sexual assault of a 17-year-old white woman. The attacker was alleged to have told the victim that "he had a white girl" and Anderson was arrested as he was the only black man known to police who was living with a white woman. Anderson's photo was picked out of a lineup by the victim. He was later identified in a live lineup later on but was the only person present whose photo had been shown to the victim. He was convicted. In 1988 John Otis Lincoln came forward and confessed to the crime but a judge ruled he was lying. In 2001 DNA evidence proved Anderson's innocence - and implicated Lincoln. COMPENSATION: $200,000 plus $40,000 annually for life. NOTES The analysis of Anderson's case ultimately led to the exoneration of 10 other men
CONVICTED FOR: Murder AGE ON CONVICTION: 38 AGE ON RELEASE: 64 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 26 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: Two drug dealers, James Perry Sewell and Raven Dannelle Lashbrook, were murdered in Texas. Sewell was still alive when police found him and on the way to the hospital he was alleged to have identified his attacker as "Billy Allen". Based on this and a palm print found on car in which Lashbrook was found, Billy Frederick Allen was sentenced to 99 years in jail. A paramedic later claimed the name Sewell uttered was actually "Billy Wayne Allen". Allen protested his innocence repeatedly. Further evidence from a man called Clifton Cook appeared by 2004 stating a Billy Wayne Allen had told him he had "wiped a smart-assed-son-of-a-bitch named Perry in Dallas". Allen was released in 2009. COMPENSATION: $2,073,333 as of 2013
CONVICTED FOR: Murder AGE ON CONVICTION: 27 AGE ON RELEASE: 56 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 29 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: Mary Bell, 31, was found stabbed to death in her apartment in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1982. Schizophrenic, George Allen Jr, was picked up by police as he resembled another suspect in the case who had disappeared. A taped confession was obtained despite one officer dismissing him as unreliable. He was charged despite the fact Allen lived 10 miles from the crime scene in an area which was under a 20-inch snowstorm at the time of the murder. He later denied the murder but was convicted. Various appeals failed and then in 2012 the Innocence Project found police documents eliminating Allen as a suspect that had been withheld. Semen from two different men had been found on Bell's robe that she was wearing when she was killed. Allen was released in 2012. NOTES The actual killer was never found
CONVICTED FOR: Murder AGE ON CONVICTION: 21 AGE ON RELEASE: 51 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 30 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: In 1974 Adams was sentenced to death by electric chair by an all-white jury for the murder of a transit worker on a Boston Subway. Three witnesses claimed Adams had confessed to the murder despite his entire family saying he was at home at the time. One of the witnesses, Wyatt Moore, was actually in jail at the time he said he had heard the confession. Another, his sister Susie, recanted the confession on her death bed. He was released in 2004. COMPENSATION: Undisclosed
CONVICTED FOR: Murder AGE ON CONVICTION: 28 AGE ON RELEASE: 62 TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 34 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: Adams was convicted in 1983 of murdering Cathy Ulfers, the 24-year-old wife of a New Orleans police officer. There were no fingerprints or witnesses, only a confession from Adams which he claimed was obtained under coercion by officers Venezia and Ruiz. In 2013 the Innocence Project uncovered evidence that testimony from the two police officers was false. He was exonerated in 2014. In 2006, Cathy Ulfers’ husband, Ronald, was found guilty of murdering his second wife. COMPENSATION: Only $250,000 over 10 years and $80,000 to compensate for “lost life opportunities”.
CONVICTED FOR: Murder AGE ON CONVICTION: 17 AGE ON RELEASE: 44 (Exonerated aged 57) TIME SPENT IN JAIL: 27 Years CASE AND REASON FOR EXONERATION: Ajamu (then called Ronnie Bridgeman) was convicted of the murder of 59-year-old Harold Franks in 1975 based almost entirely on the testimony a 12-year-old boy, Edward Vernon, despite it being inconsistent. Another witness said Ajamu was not one of the two men who carried out the murder and Ajamu's classmates testified he was aboard a school bus with them at the time. A reporter later claimed Vernon had admitted lying to police about the murder and the Ohio Innocence Project took on the case. They fond evidence that police had pressured Vernon to testify when he attempted to retract his statement. Ajamu was released on parole in 2003. He was exonerated in 2014. COMPENSATION: $1.6 million. NOTES Upon his exoneration Ajamu said: "I can even go back to being Ronnie Bridgeman, but I’m not. They killed Ronnie Bridgeman. They killed his spirit. They killed everything he believed in, everything he ever wanted. I wanted to be something, too. I could have been a lawyer possibly. I could have been Barack Obama. Who knows?"
Follow Sarah E. Leamon on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SarahLeamonLaw