Justice Committee on Nov. 22nd, 2006

[Craig Grimes]

There's nothing in the court data that....

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

You haven't done any. There are no statistics. I would think that would be information that would be pertinent to what we're studying here, not only the repeat crime but also the seriousness of the follow-up crime.

The next question I would ask is this, and I imagine I have the answer already because it follows on that. I'm looking at slide 6 and I'm wondering whether any research has been done, especially pertaining to Bill C-10--and you're going to have to stick with me because it's hard for me to even explain the question and what I'm looking for here--on what this graph would look like had Bill C-10 been in place during, for example, the last 15 years. If some of the people who committed these crimes were repeat offenders, and under the provisions of Bill C-10 would have been imprisoned at the time they committed the crime, the graph would certainly be more downward. To what extent would that be the case, or has anything been done?

[Lynn Barr-Telford]

With our information, we can tell you the trends over a certain time period. We cannot predict the impact of any future trends, so we can't speculate on what may happen. There are many, many factors that can impact--

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

No, I'm talking about taking numbers that actually exist. There would be data...for example, if a person committed a crime in 1999 that would require a five-year minimum sentence now, if that person in 2001 or 2002 committed another crime, you would know that. That's information from the past.

It would be interesting to see.... Obviously, that second crime would not have existed, and therefore the line would be a little lower than it is now. It would be very interesting to lay out a study like that using existing data, to see what impact that would have on this data. I'm not asking you to project anything; I'm asking you to use existing data on the information that's laid out in slide 6, and I guess--

[Craig Grimes]

That's a perspective that has been taken in the past. We know that some researchers have used these data in taking that approach. One of the difficulties in preparing a data set, and doing the analysis in quite that way with the court data, is that there are times when the sequencing of convictions is different from the sequencing of offences. Coming up with the methods to take that into consideration, in particular with low-volume offences, is particularly difficult.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

You're saying it could be done, but it would be a pretty significant task.

[Craig Grimes]

Well, the analysis would be very difficult. You'd have to take into consideration whether the offences were in sequence and whether that's important.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Statistically, though, it's safe to say--I mean, I'm not missing something here--the trend line would go down, if that were the case. I mean, obviously, if a person is incarcerated--

[Craig Grimes]

I couldn't tell you whether or not they're.... The data are based upon court convictions. The sequencing of those convictions is a function of the court process, not a function of the dates of the offence. So it is conceivable that an individual would be convicted of an offence that occurred after an offence that was convicted later.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

Thank you, Mr. Grimes.

Mr. Thompson.

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

I want to try this once more. I have to get this straight in my head. I look at the homicide rates on page 4.

I lived in the States for a number of years, and I'm quite familiar with what goes on. Things I've seen down there never seem to happen up here. For example, Clifford Olson, who was guilty of murdering multiple people, received one life sentence in Canada. In the States, I see over and over again where people receive five to seven life sentences. Does that affect these stats? Does it have any bearing? I'm curious. Maybe it does or it doesn't. I don't know.

[Craig Grimes]

In terms of the average sentences?

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Well, you're talking about the homicide rate. Let's take the Picton fellow. If indeed he gets convicted, say, of 30 murders, will that increase the homicides by 30? Or is it based on the fact that one person did it? How does that--

[John Turner]

These homicides simply represent the number of victims, regardless of whether--

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

It's the number of victims. Okay.

So in the United States they have 5.63 victims per 100,000; in Canada we have 2.04. The idea that multiple sentences occur a lot in the States and they don't seem to occur in Canada that much.... I've never heard of many sentences being served consecutively. I hear a lot about concurrent sentences, but not consecutive. Does the consecutive sentencing and the concurrent sentencing make a difference in any stat anywhere?

[Craig Grimes]

Thank you for the question. It's a good question.

It's difficult in the administrative data that we have, because we don't have any indication about consecutive or concurrent. What we are able to do with the court data is to look at the most serious offence in that case and use that as a way of presenting all of the information for the case. It is possible that there are multiple convictions within a single case. In the instance of multiple charges, it is possible to have multiple convictions within the case. But for this exercise, and with the difficulty of aggregate sentencing, the most serious is presented.

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Once again, it's still unclear to me. Does that affect the stats differently in countries? Does the way they handle the situation have an impact on the difference?

[John Turner]

In terms of the chart you're looking at, chart 4, no. These have nothing to do with sentencing whatsoever.

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

I'm still trying to get with Mr. Hanger's question from earlier.

I have a gun. I've held up seventeen 7-Eleven stores, and, oh, oh, I finally got caught, and this time I get convicted for that one. I get convicted on the one for which I got caught, but I admitted to the other sixteen. My question is whether or not that has a bearing on the stats.

[John Turner]

Again, not on chart 4. It has nothing to do with the court system—

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

I'm not talking about homicide now, I'm talking about robberies. I held up seventeen 7-Elevens and I got caught once. They took me to court and I was charged and convicted, but while I was in there, I also admitted to the other sixteen. I just can't get it clear in my mind. Is that going to have a bearing?

[Lynn Barr-Telford]

Just for clarification, your question is not whether it would have a bearing on the number of incidents, but whether it would have a bearing on the length of sentences?

[Myron Thompson, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

On the stats.

[The Chair, Conservative, Art Hanger]

What is an incident? How do you describe “an incident”?

[John Turner]

If the police have the evidence to support that the person in this example did commit sixteen crimes that they have had reported to them but which they haven't solved, then they would solve and record all sixteen of those as being committed by that person, upon their investigation.