Catapulting him into Fort Erie would be a good punishment too.
I’m sure you guys could dig up a trebuchet at least. Something with a bit of an arc to it.
Yeah, it’s gotta be a trebuchet. This is the Dope, remember.
But on a more serious note, judges have been handing down wacko sentences for years. I don;t know what this judge’s sentencing history is, but it wouldn’t be the first time one of ours has given out a bizarre sentence that was immediately overturned on the very first appeal.
Where, ironically enough, all the best strip joints are located.
Good gods, if everyone knew that the sentence was getting sent to Montreal, you’d have a major crime spree on your hands.
In the news today, Doris Day has directed the Ministry of Public Safety to look into whether the fellow’s residency status is affected by the recent conviction in the States. So the Canadian authorities may escort him back to the border: Why send Predators here, Canada asks US.
Which raises an interesting question: if he comes back to Canada, in obedience to his sentence in the U.S., and then Canada revokes his residency status and returns him to the U.S., would the American judge still be able to impose a different sentence? The guy could argue that he’s done all that he can to obey the terms of the sentence, but force canadienne has intervened, so he’s not in breach of the order.
Any thoughts, US lawyer Dopers?
I say we nuke him from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
Hay now! We’ve reached our perv quota thank you. 
Unless the order said “try to live in Canada” I suspect he will be in violation of it.
I wonder what right Canada has to prevent him from living there? Reading a bit further, this guy had sex with a 15 year old girl, a crime in NY, but the age of consent in Canada was 14 at the time, so it wouldn’t even have been a crime if he did it on the Canada side. Can they deny him entry for committing a crime in the US, that wasn’t a crime in Canada?
Apparently, Canada was ALREADY a safe haven for guys who wanted to sex up girls under the age of 17. We’re only allowing him to live in a place where his particular peccadillo was 100% government approved.
Oh, come on. Just a few. You could keep them in Bayonne. That’s justice by any standard.
Being in a position of authority makes it a crime in Canada as well (Criminal Code S.153). He may have his residency status revoked and be deported Immigration Act S.36 (2)(b).
For those in a position on responsibility/authority such as a teacher the age of consent is 18, making your point moot.
The question is can a Canadian resident/American citizen serve his American conviction on the other side of the border? I’d guess that normally the answer would be yes since there are way too many people straddling the border for this not to have happened before.
Update: the chap was arrested by Canada Customs and Immigration when he re-entered Canada, and held for a hearing. The hearing officer ruled that he does not pose an immediate danger, and released him on a $5,000 performance bond.
A further hearing is set for a couple of weeks’ time, to determine if his status as a permanent resident will be revoked as a result of his criminal conviction in the US. If so, he would likely be deported to the U.S.
See article: US Sex offender released: ‘No danger to society’.
I liked this line from the article:
I’ll bet! :rolleyes:
Sounds as if the D.A. whose office signed off on the original deal is re-thinking it, partly in response to the kefuffle from up north: U.S. Wants Sex Offender Back: ‘Exiled’ man may yet have to serve his sentence in U.S. after American prosecutor vows to appeal:
I have a couple of questions for any of the US legal dopers on sentencing principles in the US system. It sounds from the news reports that the sentencing judge offered him either a year in jail in the New York system, or three years’ probation in Canada. How is that possible? In the Canadian system, the initial question on sentencing is to ask if the accused is sufficiently dangerous to warrant a jail sentence, and if the crime was serious enough to consider jail.
If not, the judge considers other sentences, like a conditional one, probation, etc. But you’re either dangerous or you’re not, and the crime was either serious or it was not. It wouldn’t be appropriate in our system to say that the guy is dangerous enough and the crime was serious enough to jail him, but if he leaves the immediate area he’s no longer dangerous, the crime wasn’t serious, and he can get probation. Can any one comment on that? 
And then here’s my other question: how can the D.A. appeal the case to the sentencing court? If the D.A.'s office consented to the deal, how can they go back on it now? and how do you appeal to the same court that issued the sentence? isn’t the court functus?
Did they export her to Canada unbeknownst to me, or does Stockwell have the middle name “Doris”?
BTW, it’s a quaint decision on the part of that judge, needless to say. I say he should lose his residency status in Canada and be sent back to the US to serve his time.
Teaching in an all-girls’ school. Boggles the mind.
So put 'em on a plane marked Iqaluit! 
Last I heard she was in the UK herding bees with Queen Victoria.
Uh … make that Queen Elizabeth. :smack:
It’s ok, Mindfield. Makes me feel better about having been unaware of the online petition to have Stockwell Day change his name to Doris Day.
I feel very uncool.
The following depends a bit on the state, but… In the U.S., the difference between jail and probation isn’t just whether the criminal is considered dangerous- which is the impression I get about Canadian sentencing from you.
Whether or not you go to jail also depends on whether you show remorse, the severity of the crime (17-year old girl vs. 11-year old girl, say, although actual crimes committed would probably be different under NY law) and such. Whether or not you present a danger to society is a criterion, but not the only one.
As far as how his sentence can be appealed to the original court, I’m kinda confused too.
I can only suggest that since his case never actually went to trial, the judge is free to revisit his sentence, as would be the case if he’d been sentenced to probation.