Invistigated for metal detecting in canada. Any thoughts

[hmmm]

Hi All
Its me hmmm
I am not a lawyer but have some questions about a investigation that was done by cops that crown dismissed.
i quote the lead investigator . "crown blew it and blew it off - bottom line.
" Have a look at the FIRST PAGE IN THE report to crown and explain to me what the yes in the red box means.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Can you please give a little more background about what's going on ? Are you saying that someone got hassled for md'ing in Canada ? Ok, what type land was he on ? Ie.: city ? county? state/province? federal ? private ? etc.... And I have no idea what the part in red is talking about. Some sort of legaleeze ?

 

[G.I.B.]

[h=1]Young Offenders Act[/h]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Young Offenders Act (YOA) was an act of the Parliament of Canada, granted Royal Assent in 1984, that regulated the criminal prosecution of Canadian youths.[SUP][1][/SUP]The act was repealed in 2003 with the passing of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
The act established the national age of criminal responsibility at 12 years old, and said that youths can only be prosecuted if they break a law of the Criminal Code(previously, youths could be prosecuted or punished solely on the grounds that it was in the youth's "best interests").
The act also indicated that the rights established in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply to youths as well.
Controversy dogged the act for many years. Many felt that the act's limit on a three-year detention sentence for youths was overly lax, and allowed youths to get unreasonably light sentences for murder or sexual assault.[SUP][1][/SUP] This maximum was repeatedly increased, until in 1996 it was extended to a maximum of 10 years. That same year a provision was also made to allow 16-year-olds to be tried as adults in certain cases. Critics contended that this was "too harsh," as it made youths possible victims of life sentences.
The act also drew much criticism from the public for not charging young offenders under the age of 12 years, and for banning publication of the identities of youths who commit criminal acts, contending that the number of violent crimes committed by youths has dramatically increased, as have the number of repeat young offenders, since the act was passed.[SUP][1][/SUP] The demands by the Canadian public for changes for the better in dealing with youth crime, particularly in the wake of the beating and attempted murder in 1999 of then-15-year-old Jonathan Wamback in Newmarket, Ontario by a gang of teenagers,[SUP][2][/SUP] led to the introduction of the Youth Criminal Justice Act to replace the YOA.[SUP][3][/SUP]
The YOA replaced the earlier Juvenile Delinquents Act enacted in 1908.

 

[hmmm]

Relax Tom
It is a investigation towards me. I could be wrong but on the first page of the report to crown it says i was not told what i was being invistigating for , was not giver the right to my first amendment , ill get to this later. and it looks like i am a young offender.

 

[Jason in Enid]

Since you are only showing a tiny bit, it's impossible to tell. Considering YOU live there, and this is supposed to be about YOU, why are you asking us? You can GTS as easy as we can.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... It is a investigation towards me. .....

Where were you md'ing at? Find anything good ? Was it a place with a specific "no md'ing" rule , or .... were they getting you on something ancillary ? Eg.: disturbing, altering, taking, removing , etc...

 

[hmmm]

Jason , i will get further into this but i am just asking opinions on the question in red.

I actually think i know the answer, he thinks , with no evidence THAT I HAVE THE MIND OF A 10 YEAR OLD. AND SHOULD BE CLASSED AS A YOUNG OFFENDER.

 

[cudamark]

That was just page 1 of 18? And 13 exhibits? Just what the heck did you do?? Be honest now, where were you hunting and what did they tell you when confronted? Are you a "yewt"?

 

[coinbug]

You may have the mind of a 10 year old, but to be a youth in the Canadian criminal justice system you have to be 12 or older but under 18.

Also there's no "First Amendment" in Canada. Here we have The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which affords somewhat similar protections.

 

[Clay Diggins]

[h=1]Young Offenders Act[/h]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Young Offenders Act (YOA) was an act of the Parliament of Canada, granted Royal Assent in 1984, that regulated the criminal prosecution of Canadian youths.[SUP][1][/SUP]The act was repealed in 2003 with the passing of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
The act established the national age of criminal responsibility at 12 years old, and said that youths can only be prosecuted if they break a law of the Criminal Code(previously, youths could be prosecuted or punished solely on the grounds that it was in the youth's "best interests").
The act also indicated that the rights established in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply to youths as well.
Controversy dogged the act for many years. Many felt that the act's limit on a three-year detention sentence for youths was overly lax, and allowed youths to get unreasonably light sentences for murder or sexual assault.[SUP][1][/SUP] This maximum was repeatedly increased, until in 1996 it was extended to a maximum of 10 years. That same year a provision was also made to allow 16-year-olds to be tried as adults in certain cases. Critics contended that this was "too harsh," as it made youths possible victims of life sentences.
The act also drew much criticism from the public for not charging young offenders under the age of 12 years, and for banning publication of the identities of youths who commit criminal acts, contending that the number of violent crimes committed by youths has dramatically increased, as have the number of repeat young offenders, since the act was passed.[SUP][1][/SUP] The demands by the Canadian public for changes for the better in dealing with youth crime, particularly in the wake of the beating and attempted murder in 1999 of then-15-year-old Jonathan Wamback in Newmarket, Ontario by a gang of teenagers,[SUP][2][/SUP] led to the introduction of the Youth Criminal Justice Act to replace the YOA.[SUP][3][/SUP]
The YOA replaced the earlier Juvenile Delinquents Act enacted in 1908.

+1 for actually answering the poster's question!

 

[HD Paulie]

Metal detecting on federal/provincial, and some municipal parks is prohibited, but charges are not criminal in nature. Most are bylaw prohibitions. With the information that you have provided us with, it appears this is the charging officers "court brief" to crown counsel. It is now up to the crown to see if there is enough "facts and Issue" in the brief, to form a "prima facie" case against the accused. Something here just doesn't add up! I have been in law enforcement for 23 years, and I have NEVER seen or heard of anyone being charged for metal detecting in Canada! Destruction of property, theft of property from the crown yes, but never metal detecting!!

 

[Jason in Enid]

+1 for actually answering the poster's question!

Why? The OP was as capable as anyone else to google that. There were far too many unanswered questions to make this seem like a fishing expedition.

 

[Peyton Manning]

here down under we would just say to the cop " don't you have anything better to do than hassle me?"

that usually works well

 

[Jason in Enid]

here down under we would just say to the cop " don't you have anything better to do than hassle me?"

that usually works well

Don't forget to remind them that you pay their salary too. They LOVE to be reminded of that. LOL

 

[cudamark]

And be sure to sprinkle in a bunch of profanity and question the cop's parentage, just to get your point across don't you know.....!

 

[HD Paulie]

Don't forget to remind them that you pay their salary too. They LOVE to be reminded of that. LOL

If I got a dollar for every time "joe public" stated that to me, I would be retired by now, and metal detecting down south full time LOL!!

 

[hmmm]

paulie, if you are indeed in the law enforcement i would have some questions for about the case, but how do we know you are who you claim to be.
Also HD paul, i do not believe in coincidence's.
If we do discuss the case in the public's eye, I am afraid there will be more restorative justice and more desecration to heritage sites which is what i was trying to stop in the first place..

 

[HD Paulie]

paulie, if you are indeed in the law enforcement i would have some questions for about the case, but how do we know you are who you claim to be.
Also HD paul, i do not believe in coincidence's.
If we do discuss the case in the public's eye, I am afraid there will be more restorative justice and more desecration to heritage sites which is what i was trying to stop in the first place..

hmmm....First off, I wouldn't claim to be that, which I wasn't. I am surprised that you didn't PM me, rather you chose to "publicly...by way of your point to me...raise a legal question to me." I want you to know that I am NOT a lawyer, and cannot/will not provide legal advise to you. Your post suggests that there has been some "desecration to
heritage sites" which you were "trying to stop," from being in the "publics eye". My question to you, IF that was your concern....why did you post ANYTHING about it here on the forum??

 

[hmmm]

not sure what you meen by this . "I wouldn't claim to be that,"
and i never said you where a lawer and i do not need leagle advise.
I assumed you where a cop.

 

[Treasure Found]

Don't forget to remind them that you pay their salary too. They LOVE to be reminded of that. LOL

YES make sure it's like this. . . "OFFICER!! I pay more property tax's than you make in a year"
May work then again I have first hand experience with someone it didn't work for.

You know, it looks like info for a 'Grand Jury' type thing. . .