December 15th, 2018

Low bail suggests two levels of justice


By Letter to the Editor on December 5, 2018.

We share the dismay of the Provost family upon hearing that Barnaby Provost’s killer – an alleged impaired driver going the wrong way on Highway 3 – was granted bail for the ridiculously low sum of $300. It would certainly seem there are two streams of justice in Lethbridge, one for the privileged and another for those perceived as powerless.

Until our justice system first acknowledges, then addresses this shocking inequality, initiatives like swearing oaths with an eagle feather will be nothing more than window-dressing.

Don and Alice Matisz

Lethbridge

Share this story:
<5

2 Responses to “Low bail suggests two levels of justice”

  1. JustObserving says:

    With all due respect to the loss here you have forgotten a number of basic facts in drawing your two tiered conclusion. Firstly, the word ” alleged” should appear before the word “killer”. We do have a thing called the presumption of innocence which applies to all alleged offenders and which remains until guilt is established in a Court on the evidence. You are thus discussing release of a person deemed to be, at present, innocent of any crime.
    Secondly, the Bail provisions of the Criminal Code [ a Federal Statute ] mandate that an accused person IS TO BE RELEASED unless cause to detain is established. It appears there was no such cause . Certain conditions are often imposed to monitor risks and I understand this was the case here.
    Thirdly, if you monitor the Courts for any meaningful period you will see that the imposition of ANY cash bail its a rarity. Accused persons are most often released on NO deposit for any range of minor to heinous offences if release is Ordered. The figure of $300 likely reflects the ability of the accused to post bail in any amount. Clearly the amount is not meant to reflect the value of Mr Provost’s life or his significant contributions to cultural understanding.
    Lastly, the accused person here its now “in the stream of justice” as would be any other alleged offender so charged. No “privilege has saved this accused from scrutiny. I’d suggest you let the case unfold , hear the evidence and penalty if a conviction results and THEN assess the merits of its handling. Your dismay is at the least premature and in this case perhaps unfounded.

  2. biff says:

    jo- that is a most reasonable response.


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.