The ReeveLaw Blog

Google reports allegedly pornographic video involving children which has been uploaded to a Google Drive. When Google finds sexually exploitive material, they report such contraband to [the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children or NCMEC], and capture the IP addresses and account information. This information is given to local police who then obtain subscriber information of the IP address from the internet service provider and obtain a search warrant.

A tip from Google started detectives on a virtual chase through emails, phone records, social media and fetish sites that ended in the discovery of a trove of child pornography — and two arrests, including an Alberta woman accused of sexually assaulting her own young son.

Source: How internet detectives tracked a child porn trail from Idaho to Red Deer – Calgary – CBC News

Feeling assaulted is not the same thing as being assaulted. The criminal law often struggles to keep up with innovations in serious wrong-doing which sometimes causes mis-labelling of offences. The result is failure of its principal object to guide citizens and members of the public in such a way that they do not commit crimes in the first place.

A disturbing crime before the courts raises questions about how we should define wrongdoing.

Source: What sexual assault isn’t – Policy Options

Determining whether a driver is impaired by the consumption of marijuana is not as simple as is the case with alcohol. The level of THC in a person’s blood has no scientific connection to the level of impairment. “There is understandably a strong desire by both lawmakers and the public to create legal limits for marijuana impairment in the same manner we do alcohol. In the case of marijuana, this approach is flawed and not supported by scientific research.” Any “nanogram limit for THC in blood (is) picked out of thin air by politicians. Innocent people are convicted of DUI because of this.”

The study commissioned by AAA’s safety foundation said it’s not possible to set a blood-test threshold for THC that can reliably determine impairment.

Source: Scientific basis for laws on marijuana, driving questioned – WTOP

Typical lawyer answer is it’s either …. or both. The practice of law is practised ….. or we practise the practice of law ….or maybe we should just practize.

Source: –ice, –ise, –ize | SlawTips

Next stop, the Ontario Court of Appeal.

Source: CanLII – 2016 ONSC 788 (CanLII)

“About 10 per cent of Canadians — over three million people — have a criminal record.” In 2012 the previous government replaced pardons with “record suspensions”, quadrupled the fee from $150 to $631, increased the waiting periods from 3 to 5 years and 5 to 10 years and cancelled all pending applications. The present government is reviewing these changes. “Inaccessible pardons cause a major barrier to good employment” for offenders who have served their sentence and have become contributing members of society.

Trudeau government studying Harper government changes that made people wait longer and pay more to obtain a pardon

Source: Lower pardon fees mulled for minor offences as part of review

“National Police Week began in Canada in 1970 as a way to connect with communities and increase awareness about the services that police provide.” Your local and regional police services are all participating. Did you know?

Source: National Police Week | Royal Canadian Mounted Police

THE OPERATION: Beware of an operation being conducted by York Regional Police called Project Raphael. It’s stated intention is to catch those actively seeking underage sex.  It seems to be casting a very broad net.

THE METHOD: The method is to bait a target who is seeking adult prostitution services by posting an advertisement for adult sexual services in Backpages, Kijiji or a similar online service. When a target responds to the ad it is to a police officer who switches the age and poses as a female under the age of 18 years, specifically either 15 or 16 years old.  All communication is exclusively by text. The officer refuses to confirm anything by voice.  The order is to “arrest on knock”.  When the target arrives at the hotel/motel room they are immediately arrested, handcuffed, charged with a number of sexual offences and held for a bail hearing.

THE CHARGES: Offences routinely charged are “child luring” and “obtaining sexual services under 18 for consideration” both of which carry a mandatory minimum sentence of 1 year in jail up to 10 years in jail.  Both offences require registration as a sex offender for up to 20 years. 

THE LAW:  Firstly you need to know that communication for the purpose of engaging in prostitution is a criminal offence.  If it is with an adult there is a mandatory minimum sentence of a $500 fine, which also means you will acquire a mandatory criminal record. 

Secondly you need to know that the age of sexual consent is 16 years unless it is for the purpose of prostitution in which case if the person is under the age of 18 it is a criminal offence with a mandatory sentence of imprisonment from 6 months to 10 years and you will be registered as a sexual offender.

Thirdly if the fictitious person says they are underage then in the eyes of the law it is presumptive proof of that age.

Fourthly it does not matter what the real age of the person is or even whether such a person actually exists.

BE AWARE AND BE CAREFUL

Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater. “Experts believe that it could have wide-ranging implications for journalists and the media, and may allow people to sue over non-sexual images and unflattering words, even if they’re the undeniable truth.” We need to be careful that we’re not creating a bigger monster than the one we’re trying to slay.

The only thing worse than revenge porn would be bad revenge porn laws.

Source: Canada’s Expanding Revenge Porn Laws Could Threaten Journalistic Freedom | Motherboard

Let’s be clear about this. It has been the case since 1987. The results of polygraph tests are unreliable and risky. Police still use polygraph tests, not for the results but rather to put you through a process to set you up for a post-test interrogation when they tell you that you failed the test in order to obtain a confession, false or otherwise. Simple rule –> do NOT take a polygraph test.

Source: Can evidence of a polygraph test be used in court? | Provincial Court of British Columbia