Legal system is broken
Dear Editor:
Driver gets five-year suspension for woman’s death, The Record, Aug. 15.
The sentence for causing a fatal and senseless tragedy is as shocking as it is surprising!
It has been said that “there was no mention in the charge of it being a fatality,” and that the mother “had been told by police that if it were up to them (the suspect) would have been charged criminally along with (more) numerous traffic offenses.”
Unfortunately (in the opinion of some), the decision is entirely up to Crown counsel.
Why were no criminal charges laid? Why was this tragic accident not seen as caused by negligence? Why is the real factor of causing death not even mentioned in the charges? Is the fact that the accident caused death thought to be immaterial? Does the surprise decision imply that no negligence was committed at all? If not negligence, then what is the factor?
Another allegation that makes no sense to some is that “Follack was … on Sixth Avenue pointed west toward the Royal City Centre mall” before he turned left. This contradicts the impression of many people that the accident happened on the north side of the intersection, when Gemma had been running from Safeway (well known to be on the north side) in an attempt to catch a northbound bus. It does not seem plausible that the accident was on the south side or that the bus was southbound. Was the car pointed east, away from the mall, when it made the sudden (and tragic) left turn to the north?
Something is radically wrong in this society, involving the law and the present system. Many feel that the decision to lay no criminal charges was a mistake. Perhaps there is some specific reason for it, but nothing has been said, and Crown counsel’s decision should perhaps be open to question, at least in a democratic society. If not, why not? Would another Crown counsel have laid criminal charges?
If there is some legal complication in the law preventing this, there should be changes in the law.
If such a change is “impossible,” which would allow the police authorities to make the decision or strong recommendations which would carry more weight, if not pressure, then what could prevent an arbitrary counsel from refusing to charge for any reason or for no reason?
That is a real problem in this already troubled society with a broken legal system.
Terry Hilmar, New Westminster
