What is a high-risk offender? It’s a simple question, and it has a simple answer. According to the police, a high-risk offender is someone who has a high probability of breaking the law again. There is logic in the terminology. There is no misunderstanding by the layperson what it means. However, what is difficult to understand is how this definition gets completely muddled by our so-called justice system.
Take Bruce Windsor, for example. He’s a 51-year-old man who has served multiple terms in jail for child pornography-related offences. He was released from prison at the beginning of the month after serving two years in a regional psychiatric centre. And, surprise, the police picked him up six days later on charges of possession of child pornography, production of child pornography and three counts of breach of probation. This guy was designated as a high-risk offender prior to his release from prison.
Then there’s Kevin John Taylor. This 49-year-old served 12 years at the Bowden Correctional Centre for kidnapping, unlawful confinement and sexual assault on an 11-year-old Sturgeon County girl in 2000. He, too, was released from prison, only to be arrested just over a week ago and charged with seven counts of breach of recognizance. And, yes, he was also labelled a high-risk offender.
There’s an obvious problem here – the justice system is letting the very people it considers dangerous to co-exist with the rest of us. It begs the age-old question: who is the justice system working for? Who is it protecting?
There are no less than 70 high-risk offenders currently residing in Alberta. These individuals, despite having served lengthy sentences behind bars and having received treatment, still pose a serious threat to society.
So what should we do with these high-risk offenders? If we jail them permanently, it not only clogs up our prisons, but it would also cost a pile of money. Forget about the obvious cost to our personal rights and safety for a second — let’s look at the costs in terms of money. When the aforementioned individuals were released, they were placed under the watch of the Edmonton Police Service’s Behavioural Assessment Unit. What is the cost of the cops having to watch these guys upon their release? What is the cost of psychiatric evaluations? And, what is the cost of once again going through the court proceedings?
Logic becomes lost. The very people the system says are high risk are allowed back into the general population, only to be watched by the police because, well, they’re high risk. If they’re high risk, shouldn’t they remain incarcerated?
In the above cases, no one was actually harmed when these two individuals were let out of jail. This may be the case, but it’s a pretty significant risk the justice system is willing to take by allowing these men, who prey on children, back into the community.
It’s time the justice system protected the public from these predators. If past experience with these individuals dictates there’s a high probability to reoffend, then they shouldn’t be let out of jail. The law needs to be changed so that these individuals remain incarcerated, past their original sentence if need be, for the safety of the public. Or, perhaps the Criminal Code needs to be given more teeth to allow judges to hand out harsher sentences.
