I appreciate that.
Mr. Baxter, what we are talking about is the seriousness of the charges. However, if the Crown prosecutor decides to charge someone with homicide, for example, that does not necessarily mean that the individual is guilty. Do you not think it would be wiser to apply the reverse onus provision only to repeat offenders? Instead of asking an individual who does not have a criminal record, but who, rightly or wrongly, is accused of a serious crime to prove that he meets the criteria for bail, should this requirement not be reserved for repeat offenders, in other words, for the accused who have previously been convicted of similar crimes? Would our justice system be more balanced that way?