Five members from Canada’s 2018 world junior team (Hart, McLeod, Dube, Foote and Formenton) told to surrender to police, facing sexual assault charges

[oldunclehue]

Depends on the province WRT prosecutor "approving" charges. When I was a Crown Attorney in Winnipeg many years ago, there was a Crown pre-charge screening process. However, in Ontario, the police make the call -- they don't need approval from the Crown, but will sometimes seen input/advice.

Also WRT not being allowed to leave the country, this has not been my experience in 20 years practicing law in Manitoba and then Ontario. Generally, for someone with no prior record, what is required is a cash deposit to guarantee their return to the jurisdiction. Also keep in mind that the U.S. has extradition treaties with Canada so it's not like they'd be able to hide in the U.S. These guys make a lot of money so the cash deposit would be substantial, but I imagine they will be allowed to leave the country.

It would be a condition on release if the person was planning on leaving the country. That would be a discussion based around potential of flight risk. Many of these guys are pro-players with significant cash. But what will be the requirement to leave back to the USA/Europe? Once charged, the league will suspend them indefinitely therefore their reasoning to leave is moot. In a high profile case like this....I'd say it will be 50/50. But would the USA even want them back if pending charges? Anytime you cross the border in to the USA then put you through CPIC to check. And they don't let people in pending or convicted of charges very often.

 

[ERYX]

Wrong....you can be charged without being arrested, often happens and Police seek a endorsed/unendorsed warrant of arrest.

We are probably arguing semantics here as to what constitutes "charged".

I am a criminal defence attorney, I've been doing this for 20 years. In layman's terms, yes, warrants can be sought on a charge. The accused is not formally charged until arrested though.

Also, I've only ever seen unendorsed/endorsed warrants on bench warrants, not warrants at first instance but it's not something I've needed to research.

 

[oldunclehue]

They can be charged in lieu but the police don't charge for crimes in Canada, it's the prosecutor. So they get arrested and the court system processes from there.

This is wrong.... the Police lay the information and charges. In some jurisdictions the Crown Prosecutor approves the charges, it sounds like in ontario this isn't the case and Police lay charges on their own, but could of consulted with a prosecutor especially due to it being a high profile case.

 

[Byron Bitz]

Good, now it’s time for the NHL to suspend the players that were in the room and didn’t do anything to stop it.

 

[ERYX]

It would be a condition on release if the person was planning on leaving the country. That would be a discussion based around potential of flight risk. Many of these guys are pro-players with significant cash. But what will be the requirement to leave back to the USA/Europe? Once charged, the league will suspend them indefinitely therefore their reasoning to leave is mute. In a high profile case like this....I'd say it will be 50/50. But would the USA even want them back if pending charges? Anytime you cross the border in to the USA then put you through CPIC to check. And they don't let people in pending or convicted of charges very often.

Probably depends on their citizenship. If Canadian, yeah, they likely won't even be able to get into the US even if their bail conditions don't prohibit it.

 

[Team_Spirit]

6 years later...*Please come to the police station*

Nobody will spend a day in jail eh?

Poor girl should have settled off court

 

[wetcoast]

Brought to you by Bet365.

Don't laugh you can probably gets odds on who the 5 are, that's how stupid crazy sports betting is.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

They don't just charge people on false claims like that.

They absolutely do lol.

I'm not saying that's the case here. But they absolutely do. Particularly in high profile cases where there would be a public outcry if they didn't.

 

[joestevens29]

Right?

Name the five that are going to be charged, so the rest of the team can at least know they're finally in the clear.

I'm interested in seeing how the NHL's higher ups react to this news, once the names are released. Not a guarantee all five are current NHLers, nor were they NHLers at the time of the incident.

The rest of the team would know. They told the 5 to surrender.

 

[wetcoast]

Probably depends on their citizenship. If Canadian, yeah, they likely won't even be able to get into the US even if their bail conditions don't prohibit it.

You are correct in that for some crimes all it takes is being charged and then that person is barred from the states forever even if no trial happens and no conviction.

 

[ERYX]

Yikes. Unless they've got some safeguards there, that reeks of rookie cop who thinks he knows what he's doing making an arrest without actually having enough probable cause to do so.

At least with arrest warrants in the US you're getting a prosecutor and a judge to sign off saying you have probable cause to believe a criminal offense was committed.

But again, maybe there's safeguards in the Canadian system I'm not aware of.

The safeguards are the bail court and, of course, the entire justice/trial system.

That said, to seek a warrant for arrest, yes, the police would have to present their case to a judge and convince them to endorse their application. Warrantless arrests can be done, however, under s. 495(1) of the Criminal Code:

• 495 (1) A peace officer may arrest without warrant
  • (a) a person who has committed an indictable offence or who, on reasonable grounds, he believes has committed or is about to commit an indictable offence;
  • (b) a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence; or
  • (c) a person in respect of whom he has reasonable grounds to believe that a warrant of arrest or committal, in any form set out in Part XXVIII in relation thereto, is in force within the territorial jurisdiction in which the person is found.

Challenging such warrantless arrests after the fact and getting evidence tossed on bad arrests is pretty much my bread-and-butter as a defence lawyer. Police make warrantless arrests at their own risk. Usually they're pretty careful to make sure they have the requisite grounds so that guys like me can't get important evidence excluded at trial.

 

[oldunclehue]

We are probably arguing semantics here as to what constitutes "charged".

I am a criminal defence attorney, I've been doing this for 20 years. In layman's terms, yes, warrants can be sought on a charge. The accused is not formally charged until arrested though.

Also, I've only ever seen unendorsed/endorsed warrants on bench warrants, not warrants at first instance but it's not something I've needed to research.

I've been a Police officer for 2 decades. In this case warrants would not be required. But I have sworn charges and sought warrants on first instance charges. If an offence happens, investigation identifies the suspect who has not fled/hiding out and Police can't locate. We swear the information(charges) and seek a warrant. Happens very often in my world.

 

[SI90]

A few big names on that 2018 team. Sad to see

 

[These Are The Days]

At this point I am resigned to knowing we will never know who did it. They'll turn in and it'll continue to be this enormous mystery because someone has been paying fortune to keep it that way for 6 years now

 

[ERYX]

I've been a Police officer for 2 decades. In this case warrants would not be required. But I have sworn charges and sought warrants on first instance charges. If an offence happens, investigation identifies the suspect who has not fled/hiding out and Police can't locate. We swear the information(charges) and seek a warrant. Happens very often in my world.

So we've been playing the same game, just different "teams" and "positions" for about the same amount of time (20 years).

As I said, it appears we're arguing semantics. I am hearing from you that police consider an accused as "charged" when an information is sworn. From defence counsel perspective, I don't consider my client "charged" until they've been arrested (with or without warrant) or they've "attorned to the jurisdiction" in Court.

It's easy for laypeople to be confused over what these words mean when even the professionals have different definitions!

 

[Gizmo Tkachuk]

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

The safeguards are the bail court and, of course, the entire justice/trial system.

That said, to seek a warrant for arrest, yes, the police would have to present their case to a judge and convince them to endorse their application. Warrantless arrests can be done, however, under s. 495(1) of the Criminal Code:

• 495(1) A peace officer may arrest without warrant
  • (a) a person who has committed an indictable offence or who, on reasonable grounds, he believes has committed or is about to commit an indictable offence;
  • (b) a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence; or
  • (c) a person in respect of whom he has reasonable grounds to believe that a warrant of arrest or committal, in any form set out in Part XXVIII in relation thereto, is in force within the territorial jurisdiction in which the person is found.

Challenging such warrantless arrests after the fact and getting evidence tossed on bad arrests is pretty much my bread-and-butter as a defence lawyer. Police make warrantless arrests at their own risk. Usually they're pretty careful to make sure they have the requisite grounds so that guys like me can't get important evidence excluded at trial.

I get that. But what I'm getting it, from my own perspective, is I'd rather have the arrest warrant authorized by a prosecutor and judge than just make a PC arrest.

Now, I'd do a PC arrest all day if it's a matter of "We don't have charges on this guy yet but he's in our custody now and if we let him walk away he's a flight risk". But if I have time on my side (And again, this case is five years old and nobody's currently in custody) I'd rather have the arrest warrant than arrest on PC and file charges later.

... I'll let you read between the lines on my background.

 

[SensFactor]

Cant escape justice...their careers are over..

 

[Deadly Dogma]

Good, now it’s time for the NHL to suspend the players that were in the room and didn’t do anything to stop it.

I was under the impression it was consensual for the 1st x number of guys then she withdrew consent, so everyone who was there after consent was recanted can be in trouble.

 

[King In The North]

I can't wait to hear nothing from the league about it.

 

[oldunclehue]

The safeguards are the bail court and, of course, the entire justice/trial system.

That said, to seek a warrant for arrest, yes, the police would have to present their case to a judge and convince them to endorse their application. Warrantless arrests can be done, however, under s. 495(1) of the Criminal Code:

• 495(1) A peace officer may arrest without warrant
  • (a) a person who has committed an indictable offence or who, on reasonable grounds, he believes has committed or is about to commit an indictable offence;
  • (b) a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence; or
  • (c) a person in respect of whom he has reasonable grounds to believe that a warrant of arrest or committal, in any form set out in Part XXVIII in relation thereto, is in force within the territorial jurisdiction in which the person is found.

Challenging such warrantless arrests after the fact and getting evidence tossed on bad arrests is pretty much my bread-and-butter as a defence lawyer. Police make warrantless arrests at their own risk. Usually they're pretty careful to make sure they have the requisite grounds so that guys like me can't get important evidence excluded at trial.

The threshold of reasonable and probable grounds is not hard to reach in the Policing world, I have been challenged hundreds of times on files in court and have never had anything tossed out based on a warrantless arrest. In fact the only time we seek a warrant at first instance is if the accused is actively avoiding arrest. R vs Jordan would be an issue in almost all cases if we swore charges, sought a warrant and then arrested. Once charges are laid....the clock starts on reasonable timeline of prosecution.

 

[Balthazar]

6 years later...*Please come to the police station*

Nobody will spend a day in jail eh?

Poor girl should have settled off court

Is this a joke? She settled for 3.55M.

 

[Dr Pepper]

The rest of the team would know. They told the 5 to surrender.

True, and the rest of the team would've known all along that they're absolved.

But for the rest of us it's hard to differentiate at this point until the 5 are named. Recent events might push the needle one way or another but we just don't know until it's official.

So, again, we wait. At least we know now that it's finally almost over.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

View attachment 809299

It's like Montreal issuing their "This is why we drafted Logan Mailloux" statement 5 minutes before free agency opened, but on steroids lol.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

Mods wake up this morning and see this thread: