Good afternoon.
Thank you for your time and for allowing me this opportunity to present to you on the issue of bail reform. It is an issue that's having a significant impact in Ontario. I'm hopeful that positive changes will be made to better protect victims in communities as a result of this inquiry.
My name is Lia Vlietstra, and I have provided support to victims for the past 10 years in my role as bail court support worker at Victim Services of Brant. My position is funded through the Brant United Way. Our office is located at the Brantford police station and assists clients for the City of Brantford, Brant county and the Six Nations of the Grand River.
As part of my role in bail court, I contact victims whose offenders are appearing in bail court and obtain input from the client regarding their safety concerns and other information they would like provided to the court. I then send their input to the Crown to consider when taking a bail position in proposing conditions to the court prior to the accused's release on bail.
While speaking to the victim, I conduct a risk and needs assessment for urgent resources that the client may need immediately in case the offender is released on bail, for example, a lock change and safety planning. Following the bail hearing, I will notify the victim of the bail conditions and offer further supports.
This role has become challenging in recent years due to the volume of arrests in bail court and how quickly offenders are released. This is particularly apparent when it comes to intimate partner violence. We can face difficulty even being able to have a locksmith attend to change the locks before the accused is released on bail with nothing more than their own word that they will abide by conditions.
Notifying the victim as soon as possible of a release can become critically important. I have had to call 911 while on the phone with a victim of intimate partner violence, because the accused came through her door 10 minutes after being released on bail on conditions of no contact.
This is the unfortunate reality of our bail system. It has become a one-size-fits-all based on the ladder of release since the Supreme Court decision in R v. Antic in 2017. Currently, you can be charged with domestic violence, sexual assault or robbery and be released on the same form of release as someone charged with mischief and theft under....
Changes that I believe need to be made for public safety and public confidence in the bail system are the following.
Violent repeat offenders should be denied bail. Drug traffickers, especially of fentanyl and meth, should be denied bail. If you were charged with using a firearm, you should be denied bail. The use of more cash bail and bail estreat for those convicted of breaching their bail conditions should be estreated for the entire bail amount. Sureties need to be thoroughly vetted regarding their ability to supervise and their financial assets. In the case of intimate partner violence, the surety for the accused should not be a new intimate partner.
Bail conditions need to be put in place to address the risk factors relating to the specifics of each case. For example, if an offender is coming before the court only when they are intoxicated, conditions of supervision and support need to be put in place to address alcohol as a risk factor, especially if the charges involve violence.
Stronger conditions relating to victim safety must be put in place. In Brantford it is common for the court to impose only a 50-metre radius from the victim's residence or employment. This is approximately two residential houses apart, and it can allow for the accused to live on the same block as the victim.
In cases of criminal harassment and stalking, where the accused has no reason to be in the city in which the victim resides, a geographical radius for the entire city should be imposed. There have been cases where this was requested, and the condition was not imposed because it was too onerous on the accused.
Tertiary grounds should also be taken into consideration in cases in which the accused has an extensive criminal record. That goes to the heart of one of the prongs in the assessment on the tertiary grounds, which is public confidence in the administration of justice. Bail supervision programs should not be used as a form of supervision in cases of violence and particularly intimate partner violence. They do wonderful work, but they cannot provide the supervision necessary to alleviate concerns on the secondary grounds.
Regarding supports for offenders, much of the input that I receive from offenders, family members and intimate partners is that they want the offenders to receive the help they need. Whether it's for addictions or mental health, they want them to have a place to live where they can receive their medication and receive their mental health assessments, counselling and treatment. Unfortunately, this does not happen in bail court.
Once a justice of the peace conducts an assessment under section 493 and determines that the accused belongs to a vulnerable population, they must look to alternatives to incarceration. This can usually result in the release on their own recognizance or to the bail supervision program.
More needs to be done for low-level offenders struggling with addictions and mental health issues at the bail stage. By the time they're placed on a probation order, they can have up to 10 sets of charges.
Thank you for your attention. I'm open to any questions.