Justice Committee on April 29th, 2010

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Very briefly, on the 220 subjects, did we get a breakdown? Did you say anywhere about male/female, francophone/anglophone, aboriginal at all, that kind of thing? I didn't read any of that. What's the gist of that?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

Yes, 98% of them were men, 2% were women, 5% were aboriginal, and the average age was 36.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Francophone/anglophone?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

We don't have that. Well, given that 80% of them were in Quebec, the majority....

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Yes.

Thank you. That's it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

Mr. Woodworth.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

And thank you very much, Dr. Motiuk, for attending.

I am really quite intrigued by today's evidence, because as I was making my points, people around the table were asking you the same thing. So either your report was very well prepared and explicitly set out with things that interest us, or else great minds think alike.

I want to pick up on what Mr. Norlock was saying, because I think he was on the right track. What we're hearing from you is that the organized crime provisions, as they presently exist, actually are catching organized criminals. It's an interesting dichotomy. Organized crime happens to be run by organized criminals, and therefore, perhaps, we should be treating them differently.

If I understand you correctly, the majority of them receive sentences of three years or more. Is that correct?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

That's correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

So at least we're getting them off the streets for those three years.

And your expectation, based on general knowledge, is that there will likely be a low recidivism rate. Is that correct?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

That's correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

All right.

The converse, then, from what you've said, is that the people who are caught by the organized crime provisions are not those who are the lower-level dysfunctional offenders. Is that a fair statement?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

That's a fair statement.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Okay. So they're not in jeopardy, it seems, for whatever reason, enforcement or otherwise.

I would like to be clear. I think this was touched on. Your criteria did allow you to distinguish between street gangs and motorcycle gangs and more traditional organized crime. Is that correct?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

That's correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

And of the street gangs, it was a small percentage of your subject population that originated there. Is that correct?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

That is correct as well, less than 1%.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you. I'm trying to pick up on a few things here and there.

I'm not sure, but I think one of my colleagues asked you about this. I didn't quite catch the answer, but one of your observations was that the organized crime offenders were more likely to be released later. I wasn't sure if that was comparing similar sentences, and saying that even with similar sentences they would not be released as early, or if it was simply a function of longer sentences.

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

Methodologically, we control for sentence length, so you have an equivalent group. What would distinguish the two? Well, one would be where they started off first. Most of them started off initially at higher security levels, medium security, relative to the other group. That can be part and parcel because of the nature of the offences they were convicted of, such as drug offences plus attempted murder plus organized crime offences. They are very serious offences, and the severity of that drives upward your security level placement, combined also with the issue that there are some provisions for eligibilities later, if you're convicted for a criminal organization offence. In general, then, they would stay longer to begin with.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I wanted to be absolutely clear. On your last page, under the heading of “Key Issue”, referring to limited research, one study profiling and one study following, those two studies you're referring to are the studies you're here to talk about today. Is that correct?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

That's correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I wanted to be sure of that. Then, regarding the longitudinal post-release follow-up, are you suggesting...? That is the study that is currently being undertaken. Is that correct?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

That is correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Is it focused exclusively on the issue of recidivism, or are there other aspects of post-release that are being looked at?

[Dr. Larry Motiuk]

I'm not clear on all of the aspects of post-release, other than that they would probably look at how long till they came back into custody and for what reasons. It could be for violations of various conditions of conditional release while under supervision. They would also look at the type of crime they were involved in as well. They would also extend the analysis. This sample was 220 cases; I would estimate it's close to 450 or 500 cases by now. That would be a more robust sample, and they could replicate the profile to see if these characteristics continued to demonstrate....

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Do you have any inside track on the timeline for that report?