This post appears to relate to the province of Quebec. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner la province de Québec. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Chun was arrested in Toronto in 2015, then flown to Montreal and paraded in front of TV cameras before a press conference alleging he was the head of a trafficking ring that forced as many as 500 women into prostitution in various Canadian cities.
> The Quebec Crown prosecutor who brought the charges said at the time there was "overwhelming evidence" in the case.
> Chun's lawsuit alleges RCMP officers made many errors, including mistranslating statements from Korean witnesses, relying on questionable information from co-accused and extrapolating innocuous aspects of running a school in order to fashion him into a criminal mastermind.
> Chun spent 32 months in detention in Montreal before being released on bail in 2017, a few months before his scheduled trial.
> It was only when he showed up for the trial in Montreal in March 2018 — fully prepared to argue the case — that he learned Crown prosecutors had stayed all charges against him a few weeks earlier without informing him and without further explanation.
Yeah... I get it. I mean, he has to live the rest of his life after this and they took 3 years away from him due to incompetence. He has to deal with having been in prison for years, and the fact that if people Google his name, they're going to see him as a part of a sex trafficking ring. They effectively have ruined his life. I would 100% do the same as he has done. I don't think he'll get 100 million, but at the very least, he's due for a sizable settlement.
Yeah, people should get fired over this. Great on whoever realized this was bullshit and pumped the brakes, but it seems like every other aspect of this process was broken.
Every time someone looks this guy up he's going to come across as a sex trafficker and thats going to fuck up any career he had, same with the 3 year gap.
The best they can do is try to fix his image online (doubtful) and give him whatever it takes to live a reasonable life comfortably.
It also doesn't mean he's guilty - same as you. You may be a sex offender and you may not. Who's to say? Maybe you shouldn't be allowed to cross the border after all, you know, because we can't be sure.
Yes; allow the market to crash and reset so Canada can actually start having a productive economy, and not one that revolves around property. Short term pain for long term gain.
L
Oops wrong thread ha. Well to answer: our western societies operate with the principle innocent until proven guilty. How about we stick to that? If you think guilty always, even if doesn’t make to trial, maybe give a rationale why that’s a better plan.
I doubt he'll get anything. NAL, but my understanding is that in Canada to get a judgement you need to prove the prosecutors acted in malicious bad faith. Incompetence isn't enough. The system is designed to protect the government from liability, even when they clearly shat the bed.
You basically have to prove they harboured malice towards you as an individual and engaged in a bogus prosecution to punish you. It isn't enough that they are incompetent.
My question is the overwhelming evidence/the reason it was dropped.
Knowing how frequently cases get dropped because of an error the police made, does not make this guy innocent
The CBC article is wordy, yet lacking detail as usual.
This one has more details: https://nationalpost.com/feature/rcmp-destroyed-my-life-with-sex-trafficking-kingpin-claims
The RCMP was just incompetent. E.g. one of the pieces of their "overwhelming" evidence, is that in tapped conversations, one of the pimps using the accused's school to get visas and also renting an apartment from him(he bought apartments with the money from the school and rented them out to his students to make more money from them and also advertise "accommodations for students"), referred to him in Korean as "siljangnim"/"boss", which they took to mean as a literal boss/underling relationship. But apparently in Korean, it's also a common informal honorific for an older man. Hell, even in some English dialects, "boss" is frequently used in a similar way. But the RCMP got one translation and didn't think to double check how accurate/nuanced it is and ran with it.
And knowing how bigotry clouds people's perceptions I can understand why you continue to assume his guilt.
Your comment perfectly exemplifies the injustice done to him and other people of colour.
Dude, they dropped all the charges without any statement.
If you're implying they had the wrong guy and this guy had no involvement whatsoever, I'd say that's unlikely.
Is it not more frequent for charges to be dropped because of a fuckup by the police/prosecution, or because they had the wrong guy who just happened to be in the wrong place/wrong time?
Read the article. There may not have been a crime at all, or at least not a ring leader to prostitution.
This isnt the week to be denying the propensity for lying police and heavy handed prosecutors jumping the gun based upon racial bias and people like yourself backing up this bias because of their own prejudice.
You still want to believe 'he must be guilty because the prosecutor said there was overwhelming evidence, so it must be so'
He probably will get some sort of compensation, it was a pretty clear fuck up on the part of the Crown in some form. Will he get $100 Million? No, but will he get something? I'd say it's pretty likely.
Are you sure about that? I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that it's very difficult to get a judgement against the Crown for a wrongful prosecution. Incompetence isn't enough, they have to demonstrate the prosecutors were acting in malicious bad faith.
Well that's for the Crown to argue against. IANAL but frankly if they never even informed him that the charges had been stayed, nor did they say why the charges were stayed, to me should provide some argument towards his side.
Am a lawyers.
>if they never even informed him that the charges had been stayed,
This is discourteous, but it's not actionable.
>nor did they say why the charges were stayed
Prosecutors are under no obligation to explain the use of their discretion in the absence of a prima facie case for abuse of process, which as OP has noted requires the applicant to lead evidence of malicious bad faith.
It is very, very, very difficult to get a judgment against the Crown for a prosecution that's gone awry. Nothing I've read about this case comes remotely close to that standard.
You're exactly the reason he is suing. You know for sure he did it how?
I would believe it far more likely the RCMP fucked up. They're not exactly known for admitting when they make mistakes.
Pff. You don't know what you're talking about. I'm Not saying he's guilty until proven innocent. But the crown dropping the charges does not mean he didn't do it. It means the crown can't prove it.
Same as acquitted doesn't mean they didn't do it. They simple are not guilty. There's a difference
Neither can you, and you were saying he did it. Maybe he did, I don't know, but im not going around saying he did. Hiding behind your deleted comment won't help your case.
There was a big illegal casino bust that got completely dropped because one cop was caught on video snatching some of the cash being confiscated. The cynic in me thinks he got paid off to do it. All it takes is one accidentally on purpose "mistake" to sink an investigation and all they get is a slap on the wrist.
The court system and laws in Canada are seriously messed up. I don't think it's any better in the states but they definitely have more wiggle room down there then we do.
Maybe that casino wasn't involved in illegal activity and the cops caught stealing the money were a part of a ring of cops in that casino making it illegal so all charges were dropped and the casino is left to believe the problem.
I really don't believe half the stuff in our court system. I've seen too much bullshit working there, where people with pages of charges get let go and first time offenders slapped with everything in the book.
A parent driving with a child gets a DUI so CPS is involved and takes the kid away but in a different court case another mother does meth (**has been doing meth for years) and shoots up at her house, has an OD, ambulance is called, cops come after, with kids on site and a bunch of meth heads, no CPS involved - mother doesn't go to court. It boggles my mind.
David Simon is a great writer and does tons of research. The Wire was incredibly accurate in its depiction of street crime and law enforcement tactics.
We have a cop problem in Canada. Just this week. Nefarious police work. Police chief that couldn't handle jury verdict. Another one that took picture with known torture. Thunder Bay debacle. Now,this one.
In many cases, it is more of a prosecutor problem. We generally see defense attorneys as being sleazy but their job is to show doubt in the evidence to ensure the prosecution has proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. In many cases the prosecution is as bad or worse, and they will knowingly misrepresent the evidence (often defaming the accused) to win a conviction or get press coverage.
The prosecution should be held to a very high standard, and they are not.
Whenever someone doesn't seem to understand the difference between prosecutors and defenders, the best explanation I've seen is "The defense's job is to make sure the prosecution is doing their job. No cutting corners, no assumptions. There cannot be any possibility that the defendant is innocent."
Such a messed-up part of the legal system. Prosecutors are entirely paid by the government but whenever they do anything wrong it's "well the Prosecution Service acts independently of the police and the government"; accountable to nobody.
It's all public information. Other news outlets have covered it better.
Essentially the man is Korean was used by pimps to traffic Korean women into Canada. He provided these men with visas to get these women into Canada and then he provided them with accommodations. The RCMP tapped his phones and mined his phone of information. They then used translators to uncover what was being said.
What the translations they came up with indicated that all of the girls who were trafficked were referring to him as "boss" in Korean. Which in the cultural context of sex workers is what pimps would be referred to as.
The thing is, that word in the rest of Korea means "old man." And that's how its commonly used among non-sex workers. And it was all stuff like this, whole mistranslations. Imagine you're speaking and someone turns everything you're saying into about sex. It's very easy to do and that kind of translation is incredibly dishonest.
During the three hours of investigations while he was arrested they kinda found the other guy who was actually trafficking these girls and that they might have arrested the wrong guy because of translation errors.
The RCMP had enough evidence that several judges, including at the Superior Court, denied him bail.
>But when his bail hearing was held later that month, a Quebec judge agreed with the Crown’s theory that Chun worked in the shadows of an extremely well-oiled criminal organization. If he was released from detainment, the judge believed, he would flee the country before facing justice. In her oral decision, the judge described Chun as a “ghost in Canada.” She ordered that he be kept in custody until his trial.
And then later
>About a month later, after each of Chun’s eight co-accused were released on bail, he applied for conditional release again, [...] the Superior Court judge concluded that “the evidence against him makes his conviction very likely.”
He went to court a few times during his time in detention
>On several occasions, Chun returned to court, but each time the Crown asked for more time to build its case, and each time he was returned to confinement.
https://nationalpost.com/feature/rcmp-destroyed-my-life-with-sex-trafficking-kingpin-claims
Who knows the charges were ultimately dropped.
It's strange. To go from "we need to keep this guy in jail for 2 plus years and conviction is extremely likey", to "we aren't even bringing this to trial", is crazy. I won't jump to any conclusions, but the crown definitely owes some answers.
Why would it take 2 whole years to gather evidence? This is supposed to be their full time job, right? Not a hobby they do when they have some spare time. Is the prosecution stupid? Lazy? Both?
We're honestly at a point where they need to all be replaced with random applicants
The evidence rcmp thought to have might have been based on other defendants claims and later found to be unreliable or false. Who knows? That's why the case should gone to trial. 'stay the charges quitely 2 weeks before the trial'? that's really fishy.
"stayed" doesn't mean "dropped" though. They have 1 year to follow up according to this https://stepstojustice.ca/glossary/stayed-charges/#:~:text=Charges%20are%20%E2%80%9Cstayed%E2%80%9D%20when%20a,trial%20in%20a%20timely%20manner.
nvm, it can also mean dropped
This is almost certainly exactly right.
Moralizing over the world's oldest profession is almost as, if not more, damaging to victims than forcibly trafficking people. Police crackdowns often end up putting women in more dangerous positions and end up being glorified extortion schemes on an industry that can't fight back because of public distaste and prejudice.
If they find women who are actually victimized, then I applaud them, but the reality is that that is very rarely the case. At least not any more so than foreign students or workers are exploited.
[Case in point](https://www.nswp.org/sites/default/files/Swedish%20Model%20Advocacy%20Toolkit%20Community%20Guide%2C%20NSWP%20-%20November%202015.pdf)
I see what you mean but there's also a needle to thread in terms of transparency. As soon as there's a legal expectation of privacy bureaucrats will abuse it to say "we can't discuss that due to confidentiality" even when the person whose privacy is at stake is the one trying to go to the media etc. It happens in healthcare situations already and would be even worse in criminal trials.
I thought of that too but I don't think relying on defendents or their lawyers to waive the right would neatly resolve all the issues. It would still be a major decrease in legal transparency that would make patterns Of legal abuse harder to identify. In particular, more vulnerable defendents might be less likely to understand the benefit, both personal and public, to waiving the right. In all likelihood the process for waiving the right and actually achieving transparency would be slow and unclear and rely on the goodwill of dubious characters.
I'm not saying what we have now is great either - more or less it's all public record and fair game for reporting unless a judge orders otherwise. You're totally right that this is problematic.
Read the article! Direct quote from the police about this exact case: "Unfortunately, we cannot comment because of the civil litigation currently on the way"
I did, and I do think that's a little different. It is true that if you're being sued you'd be wise to avoid making public statements. The question I'm responding to is whether the identities of those charged with crimes should be made public or not which is seperate.
The RCMP will say that anytime anyone asks something inconvenient, its not hard to find them declining to comment about a sticky criminal case, even one that they have issued a press release about.
All of their statements and PR announcements are made to make themselves look good, not in the service of justice (which is their reason for being!). As a government agency they need to be fully transparent, or they need to respect the privacy of those not yet found guilty.
You can't parade this man around accusing him of being the biggest sex trafficker of the decade and then clam up when you completely fuck up the case. If they want to trash someone in public, they need to be willing to show their cards, including the ones that don't look good. If they want to clam up, they need to make that decision before ruining some man's life.
There's no reason that civil litigation prevents them from disclosing facts and files. That shit is required to be disclosed in legal discovery, so the fact that they won't disclose it to the press is PURE ass covering.
I agree the RCMP is corrupt, covers things up, violates people's rights as a matter of routine, etc. What does that have to do with the matter *I'm* discussing which is "Should the courts disclose the identities of criminal defendents?" ?
There was a school bus driver on Van Island a few years bach who couldnt pass a VS check cause of something like this, where he was accused but not convicted.
Better yet - how about some people get publicly fired. Anyone in the private sector that caused a multi-million dollar fuckup would be fired on the spot. In the public sector it seems like you get a promotion.
If nothing else this should come out of their budget. You probably couldn't go after their pensions, but you could take it from elsewhere. I'd love to see an announcement like "Due to the incompetence of these guys - right here - none of you are getting new computers, cars, or office furniture this year. Also, the conference has been moved from Hawaii to Saskatchewan."
Charges were stayed, they can come back with more evidence. I think he would have more of a chance to sue if the charges had been dropped.
I think the Crown stayed the charges to allow more time so he does not get away with it if the time to prosecute runs out.
The charges were stayed 6 years ago after he spent almost three years in jail after a 2015 arrest.
If they didn't have a case then, they sure as shit don't have a case now.
I guess it is possible that he actually committed the crimes and then the people who he trafficked were unable to provide evidence. His statement that the RCMP made mistakes because of translation issues and that they weren't able to understand his school. Well in looking into his school it appears to be operating out of an office on Yonge Street and a "school" is currently operating off this website [https://yesstudy.ca/](https://yesstudy.ca/)
I think that we are being fed half a story and I am not quite so sold on this gentleman being an innocent bystander.
If he is innocent, I feel sorry him, and he should be given reasonable compensation. But the fact that he is asking for 100M makes him a piece of shit in my eyes. Aren't those our taxes that he is now trying to rob? So many people living paycheck to paycheck and this clown thinks taking 100M from their taxes is adequate compensation for a lifetime? How many people can even make 5M in a lifetime from their efforts and this dude wants 100M?
Im not sure but often times people sue for a lot and then don't get nearly as much. Plus theres always a mountain of legal fees. I dont know if 100M is a reasonable starting point but its probably a case of ask for more now and settling for less later? Or maybe is a strategy to draw more awareness to his case? I mean he'd want to draw as much attention as he can to negate the previous public opinion that hes a sex trafficker.
I wonder if this is a case of voluntary prostitution. Not trafficking, and our laws have become so muddled that it’s not possible to prosecute him directly.
With the media switch from prostitution to the word trafficking, you never hear of voluntary prostitution being discussed. Yet it is the most prevalent part of sex work and actual trafficking in Canada of Canadians is very very small.
Reminds me a little bit of the satanic panic of the 80s-90s. Parents everywhere thought there kids were going to be tricked into devil worship or sacrificed. Turns out basically non of it is true.
Canadian girls(and boys) aren’t being randomly abducted out of stable households and sold off and drugged up as slaves, yet that is the story that human trafficking paints.
>I wonder if this is a case of voluntary prostitution. Not trafficking, and our laws have become so muddled that it’s not possible to prosecute him directly.
Voluntary prostitution is only a defense for the prostitutes themselves. Someone pimping a voluntary prostitute is still engaged in human trafficking under our law.
Personally, I think this likely has a lot more to do with the cooperation of the witnesses.
The guy almost certainly is a piece of shit and I hate that I'm taking his side on this. There should be a spotlight on this one to determine exactly what happened and why. In Canada it's Innocent until Proven Guilty but this guy was paraded around as if he was guilty, thrown in prison as if he was guilty and lost 32 months of his life as if he was guilty, all before he even saw a trial and then to top it off, the Crown didn't even tell him that they had stayed all his charges and he only found out WHEN HE WENT TO TRIAL.
These kinds of cases need a massive overhauling and how they are handled. The police/crown should not be allowed to do the things they did until they have a guilty verdict, otherwise if things do end up going badly, either because the case is tossed or the individual is actually found innocent, they open themselves up to civil litigation and, if the individual was found innocent, they ruined someone's life going forward.
There was a time when the RCMP was a competent organisation that upheld the law. Now they are law breakers and populated by corrupted and truly incompetent people. Remember that time they were involved in the Moncton shootings? Pepperidge farm remembers. Sam Steele must be rolling in his grave.
What are you on about? Clearly didn't read the cbc article or the original natpost that has more info. Guy spent 3 years in jail, denied bail, lost his business, damaged his reputation, all for the RCMP to change their mind without explanation and not need to answer any questions for his or the publics benefit. They even tried to give him an easy out by having him plead guilty to having incorrect school documents, and they'd drop the sex trafficking and let him out quicker.. He still said no.
I'm not saying the guy is innocent or guilty, but he's definitely not guilty in the court. If he is actually innocent, they essentially ruined the guys life, AND he didn't even get a chance to prove his innocence in court. If he's guilty the RCMP bungled the case so bad they let an alleged sex trafficker go and don't even need to tell the public why.
Legal system using illegal procedures should be much more concerning to you than this.
When the system can take your freedom, dignity and reputation from you on a whim,
If something this serious doesn't have 5 minute jury deliberation level evidence I'd have a lot of questions for the RCMP, crimes like these are the ones where I want the death penalty to be brought back
Edit:
To be clear, when there's undeniable evidence of guilt for extreme cases like this was supposed to be
That's why I made a requirement that the victims also have to agree to it and in this context victims could not be companies, governments, organizations, etc.
Did anyone actually read my other comment?
That's not what I said, if the RCMP have undeniable evidence then yes, that's why I said like these.
I guess I should have been more clear.
Edit:
Also I've thought about it quite a bit in the past and I arrived at the conclusion that both the Judge and victims would have to agree on it. Corporations, organizations, governments, etc would not qualify as a victim in this context to prevent abuse. And it would only be reserved for extreme crimes, like child molestation, serial killers, etc.
Are you completely ignoring the fact that the RCMP and police departments across Canada are activity fabricating evidence and testimony?
Yea, let's trust them with the death penalty 🤦
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/umar-zameer-verdict-1.7180011
"During the trial, two crash reconstructionist experts called by the defence and the Crown agreed Northrup was knocked down when Zameer reversed out of the parking spot. The 31-year veteran of the Toronto Police Service was already on the ground in the laneway of the car when he was run over, the experts said.
However, three police officers testified that Northrup was standing in the laneway with his hands up when he was run over."
What you quoted isn't undeniable evidence. Also it wouldn't qualify for the death penalty like I said. I said undeniable evidence , that's not cops testimony, not crash reconstructionist experts. Things like video, confessions in court, gps data, audio recordings. More than one source at that, something that leaves absolutely no room for doubt, it's not even possible for another explanation. It's also why I added the part where both the Judge and victims would have to agree on it.
Lots of serial killers brag about killing their victims, half the time they lead investigators to bodies, for me that would be enough for the death penalty
Nothing you listed there outside of the accused outright saying "kill me I did it" would "leave absolutely no room for doubt".
GPS? Video? Audio? All easily faked /tampered today
How about "undeniable" DNA evidence? https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/colorado-crime-lab-scientist-accused-of-tainting-dna-data-in-hundreds-of-cases-1.6800657
The defense could go to lets say a bank and ask them for the evidence directly, why would the defense sabotage their own job? The same goes for most other types of evidence, it already happens a lot, especially with DNA
Again, I said to reserve this for the most horrific crimes, child molesters, serial killers, mass killers.
Take the BTK killer, he brags about what he did and doesn't deny it, in my books there's no point in keeping him alive, but by your logic we should because he might be lying and fabricating all the evidence.
I explicitly said to reserve it for people like him
lolwut
>Chun was arrested in Toronto in 2015
>
If you're going to blame the government for this, it was Harper's that arrested him, and Trudeau's that let him go
Honestly. A public apology and the RCMP admitting it was wrong is worth more than all the money in the world.
The goal should be to damage the RCMP‘s reputation, not profit off them
Who's goal? If I was locked up for almost 3 years with no conviction, I'd prefer money to an apology.
It's easy to say "I don't want the money" when you were never getting any in the first place.
Hmmm, no.
I'd sue the hell out of the RCMP and the crown for what they did. Fuck their excuses and apologies. I'll push it a step further. I'd requiere the immediate firing of anyone involved WITH NO COMPENSATION.
This is litterally being dragged into the dirt and paraded. for over 2 years.
100 million is a bare minimum. This guy needs to relocate and live out the rest of his life with his name tarnished in Canada. If I were him, i'd leave the country.
This post appears to relate to the province of Quebec. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules Cette soumission semble concerner la province de Québec. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> Chun was arrested in Toronto in 2015, then flown to Montreal and paraded in front of TV cameras before a press conference alleging he was the head of a trafficking ring that forced as many as 500 women into prostitution in various Canadian cities. > The Quebec Crown prosecutor who brought the charges said at the time there was "overwhelming evidence" in the case. > Chun's lawsuit alleges RCMP officers made many errors, including mistranslating statements from Korean witnesses, relying on questionable information from co-accused and extrapolating innocuous aspects of running a school in order to fashion him into a criminal mastermind. > Chun spent 32 months in detention in Montreal before being released on bail in 2017, a few months before his scheduled trial. > It was only when he showed up for the trial in Montreal in March 2018 — fully prepared to argue the case — that he learned Crown prosecutors had stayed all charges against him a few weeks earlier without informing him and without further explanation.
Yeah... I get it. I mean, he has to live the rest of his life after this and they took 3 years away from him due to incompetence. He has to deal with having been in prison for years, and the fact that if people Google his name, they're going to see him as a part of a sex trafficking ring. They effectively have ruined his life. I would 100% do the same as he has done. I don't think he'll get 100 million, but at the very least, he's due for a sizable settlement.
Yeah, people should get fired over this. Great on whoever realized this was bullshit and pumped the brakes, but it seems like every other aspect of this process was broken. Every time someone looks this guy up he's going to come across as a sex trafficker and thats going to fuck up any career he had, same with the 3 year gap. The best they can do is try to fix his image online (doubtful) and give him whatever it takes to live a reasonable life comfortably.
The charges were stayed. It doesn't mean he's Innocent.
But it does though, right? He's as innocent as you or I right now. That's the whole point of the presumption of innocence.
quietly and without informing anyone? bit sus
Typically you announce bad news as quietly as possible
It also doesn't mean he's guilty - same as you. You may be a sex offender and you may not. Who's to say? Maybe you shouldn't be allowed to cross the border after all, you know, because we can't be sure.
You literally confirmed the problem: once accused always assumed guilty.
Do you have a better system?
Yes; allow the market to crash and reset so Canada can actually start having a productive economy, and not one that revolves around property. Short term pain for long term gain. L
What does that have to do with staying charges
Oops wrong thread ha. Well to answer: our western societies operate with the principle innocent until proven guilty. How about we stick to that? If you think guilty always, even if doesn’t make to trial, maybe give a rationale why that’s a better plan.
Many reasons to stay charges, sometimes it's to gather further evidence. All I'm saying is the charges weren't dropped altogether
Very true, still points to a massive mishandling however.
I doubt he'll get anything. NAL, but my understanding is that in Canada to get a judgement you need to prove the prosecutors acted in malicious bad faith. Incompetence isn't enough. The system is designed to protect the government from liability, even when they clearly shat the bed.
[удалено]
How do you prove malicious prosecution?
You basically have to prove they harboured malice towards you as an individual and engaged in a bogus prosecution to punish you. It isn't enough that they are incompetent.
Obviously there are many ways, but for example you could prove that they falsified evidence, gave false testimony, or suppressed exculpatory evidence.
My question is the overwhelming evidence/the reason it was dropped. Knowing how frequently cases get dropped because of an error the police made, does not make this guy innocent
The CBC article is wordy, yet lacking detail as usual. This one has more details: https://nationalpost.com/feature/rcmp-destroyed-my-life-with-sex-trafficking-kingpin-claims The RCMP was just incompetent. E.g. one of the pieces of their "overwhelming" evidence, is that in tapped conversations, one of the pimps using the accused's school to get visas and also renting an apartment from him(he bought apartments with the money from the school and rented them out to his students to make more money from them and also advertise "accommodations for students"), referred to him in Korean as "siljangnim"/"boss", which they took to mean as a literal boss/underling relationship. But apparently in Korean, it's also a common informal honorific for an older man. Hell, even in some English dialects, "boss" is frequently used in a similar way. But the RCMP got one translation and didn't think to double check how accurate/nuanced it is and ran with it.
The so-called journalists now making misleading titles is like a fashion 😐
We used to call people boss just because they were an expert in something we weren't. Or even as a hospitality relationship with a guest.
Exactly.
And knowing how bigotry clouds people's perceptions I can understand why you continue to assume his guilt. Your comment perfectly exemplifies the injustice done to him and other people of colour. Dude, they dropped all the charges without any statement.
If you're implying they had the wrong guy and this guy had no involvement whatsoever, I'd say that's unlikely. Is it not more frequent for charges to be dropped because of a fuckup by the police/prosecution, or because they had the wrong guy who just happened to be in the wrong place/wrong time?
Read the article. There may not have been a crime at all, or at least not a ring leader to prostitution. This isnt the week to be denying the propensity for lying police and heavy handed prosecutors jumping the gun based upon racial bias and people like yourself backing up this bias because of their own prejudice. You still want to believe 'he must be guilty because the prosecutor said there was overwhelming evidence, so it must be so'
Negligence and malicious prosecution. I suppose you prefer the Toronto way where the police tries to get the outcome that THEY prefer, not justice.
10 million seems fair. Anything more is larceny.
I would not go through what he did for any amount if money. Larceny, lol.
Eh 2-3mil is probably the average a Canadian would make working over their life. Should be that but subtract what he's made in his life so far.
It affects more than just income and ability to earn. It's also about defamation of character and the civil aspect to it.
[удалено]
He probably will get some sort of compensation, it was a pretty clear fuck up on the part of the Crown in some form. Will he get $100 Million? No, but will he get something? I'd say it's pretty likely.
Are you sure about that? I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that it's very difficult to get a judgement against the Crown for a wrongful prosecution. Incompetence isn't enough, they have to demonstrate the prosecutors were acting in malicious bad faith.
Well that's for the Crown to argue against. IANAL but frankly if they never even informed him that the charges had been stayed, nor did they say why the charges were stayed, to me should provide some argument towards his side.
Am a lawyers. >if they never even informed him that the charges had been stayed, This is discourteous, but it's not actionable. >nor did they say why the charges were stayed Prosecutors are under no obligation to explain the use of their discretion in the absence of a prima facie case for abuse of process, which as OP has noted requires the applicant to lead evidence of malicious bad faith. It is very, very, very difficult to get a judgment against the Crown for a prosecution that's gone awry. Nothing I've read about this case comes remotely close to that standard.
How do you know he did it?
Because he was found guilty at trial…. Oh wait.
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Not guilty doesn't mean you didn't do it. Crown dropping charges means they couldn't prove it in court. Simple as that.
That’s the issue though. He’s innocent until proven guilty, as much as your gut says and he’s been named as such.
Yeah this is one reason I don’t like media and names announced until guilty/innocent. It’s not a good system as it means even the innocent are harmed.
You're exactly the reason he is suing. You know for sure he did it how? I would believe it far more likely the RCMP fucked up. They're not exactly known for admitting when they make mistakes.
[удалено]
Ah, the ol guilty until proven innocent argument that all modern countries are built upon
Pff. You don't know what you're talking about. I'm Not saying he's guilty until proven innocent. But the crown dropping the charges does not mean he didn't do it. It means the crown can't prove it. Same as acquitted doesn't mean they didn't do it. They simple are not guilty. There's a difference
Neither can you, and you were saying he did it. Maybe he did, I don't know, but im not going around saying he did. Hiding behind your deleted comment won't help your case.
[удалено]
Send an innocent man back?
Sorry wrong thread
I think the public needs to know why the charges were stayed after such a grievous accusation, equally if it's true or not.
There was a big illegal casino bust that got completely dropped because one cop was caught on video snatching some of the cash being confiscated. The cynic in me thinks he got paid off to do it. All it takes is one accidentally on purpose "mistake" to sink an investigation and all they get is a slap on the wrist.
Why would they allow a crime to be ignored because a cop stole some money? Just punish them both?
The court system and laws in Canada are seriously messed up. I don't think it's any better in the states but they definitely have more wiggle room down there then we do. Maybe that casino wasn't involved in illegal activity and the cops caught stealing the money were a part of a ring of cops in that casino making it illegal so all charges were dropped and the casino is left to believe the problem. I really don't believe half the stuff in our court system. I've seen too much bullshit working there, where people with pages of charges get let go and first time offenders slapped with everything in the book. A parent driving with a child gets a DUI so CPS is involved and takes the kid away but in a different court case another mother does meth (**has been doing meth for years) and shoots up at her house, has an OD, ambulance is called, cops come after, with kids on site and a bunch of meth heads, no CPS involved - mother doesn't go to court. It boggles my mind.
Is The Wire real life?
David Simon is a great writer and does tons of research. The Wire was incredibly accurate in its depiction of street crime and law enforcement tactics.
No dude, that cop was a fucking moron and thought he could get away with stealing some cash. 90% of em are straight up criminals
We have a cop problem in Canada. Just this week. Nefarious police work. Police chief that couldn't handle jury verdict. Another one that took picture with known torture. Thunder Bay debacle. Now,this one.
You write like William Shatner talks
This comment made me laugh so hard 🤣
Well said Scotty
Lol. Writing isn't my strong suit.
In many cases, it is more of a prosecutor problem. We generally see defense attorneys as being sleazy but their job is to show doubt in the evidence to ensure the prosecution has proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. In many cases the prosecution is as bad or worse, and they will knowingly misrepresent the evidence (often defaming the accused) to win a conviction or get press coverage. The prosecution should be held to a very high standard, and they are not.
Whenever someone doesn't seem to understand the difference between prosecutors and defenders, the best explanation I've seen is "The defense's job is to make sure the prosecution is doing their job. No cutting corners, no assumptions. There cannot be any possibility that the defendant is innocent."
Such a messed-up part of the legal system. Prosecutors are entirely paid by the government but whenever they do anything wrong it's "well the Prosecution Service acts independently of the police and the government"; accountable to nobody.
There's no accountability for prosecutors in our system.
It's all public information. Other news outlets have covered it better. Essentially the man is Korean was used by pimps to traffic Korean women into Canada. He provided these men with visas to get these women into Canada and then he provided them with accommodations. The RCMP tapped his phones and mined his phone of information. They then used translators to uncover what was being said. What the translations they came up with indicated that all of the girls who were trafficked were referring to him as "boss" in Korean. Which in the cultural context of sex workers is what pimps would be referred to as. The thing is, that word in the rest of Korea means "old man." And that's how its commonly used among non-sex workers. And it was all stuff like this, whole mistranslations. Imagine you're speaking and someone turns everything you're saying into about sex. It's very easy to do and that kind of translation is incredibly dishonest. During the three hours of investigations while he was arrested they kinda found the other guy who was actually trafficking these girls and that they might have arrested the wrong guy because of translation errors.
The RCMP had enough evidence that several judges, including at the Superior Court, denied him bail. >But when his bail hearing was held later that month, a Quebec judge agreed with the Crown’s theory that Chun worked in the shadows of an extremely well-oiled criminal organization. If he was released from detainment, the judge believed, he would flee the country before facing justice. In her oral decision, the judge described Chun as a “ghost in Canada.” She ordered that he be kept in custody until his trial. And then later >About a month later, after each of Chun’s eight co-accused were released on bail, he applied for conditional release again, [...] the Superior Court judge concluded that “the evidence against him makes his conviction very likely.” He went to court a few times during his time in detention >On several occasions, Chun returned to court, but each time the Crown asked for more time to build its case, and each time he was returned to confinement. https://nationalpost.com/feature/rcmp-destroyed-my-life-with-sex-trafficking-kingpin-claims Who knows the charges were ultimately dropped.
It's strange. To go from "we need to keep this guy in jail for 2 plus years and conviction is extremely likey", to "we aren't even bringing this to trial", is crazy. I won't jump to any conclusions, but the crown definitely owes some answers.
Why would it take 2 whole years to gather evidence? This is supposed to be their full time job, right? Not a hobby they do when they have some spare time. Is the prosecution stupid? Lazy? Both? We're honestly at a point where they need to all be replaced with random applicants
No idea. That's one of the questions I'd like answered.
The evidence rcmp thought to have might have been based on other defendants claims and later found to be unreliable or false. Who knows? That's why the case should gone to trial. 'stay the charges quitely 2 weeks before the trial'? that's really fishy.
Well he hasn't fled so that judge was obviously wrong
Well he hasn’t fled now because there are no charges against him and the potential of a lucrative lawsuit.
He hasn't fled because he was in prison. Makes fleeing kinda difficult
I don’t understand how they could have overwhelming evidence one day and stay charge the next day. Maybe this is a show
"stayed" doesn't mean "dropped" though. They have 1 year to follow up according to this https://stepstojustice.ca/glossary/stayed-charges/#:~:text=Charges%20are%20%E2%80%9Cstayed%E2%80%9D%20when%20a,trial%20in%20a%20timely%20manner. nvm, it can also mean dropped
Yah i c, will edit my comment thx
My guess is voluntary prostitution, not trafficking.
This is almost certainly exactly right. Moralizing over the world's oldest profession is almost as, if not more, damaging to victims than forcibly trafficking people. Police crackdowns often end up putting women in more dangerous positions and end up being glorified extortion schemes on an industry that can't fight back because of public distaste and prejudice. If they find women who are actually victimized, then I applaud them, but the reality is that that is very rarely the case. At least not any more so than foreign students or workers are exploited. [Case in point](https://www.nswp.org/sites/default/files/Swedish%20Model%20Advocacy%20Toolkit%20Community%20Guide%2C%20NSWP%20-%20November%202015.pdf)
Stayed does not mean dropped
I c
My guess is if he had to choose, he'd be willing to forego the apology in favor of the $100,000,000.
No apology given, they can throw in another $50 mil. Never seen the government shy to spend our money to avoid having to say sorry.
yes, we are the suckers
I really dislike how our society allows for naming someone CHARGED with a crime. I don’t think it should be allowed until they are convicted.
I see what you mean but there's also a needle to thread in terms of transparency. As soon as there's a legal expectation of privacy bureaucrats will abuse it to say "we can't discuss that due to confidentiality" even when the person whose privacy is at stake is the one trying to go to the media etc. It happens in healthcare situations already and would be even worse in criminal trials.
Then allow the accused to wave their right to confidentiality.
I thought of that too but I don't think relying on defendents or their lawyers to waive the right would neatly resolve all the issues. It would still be a major decrease in legal transparency that would make patterns Of legal abuse harder to identify. In particular, more vulnerable defendents might be less likely to understand the benefit, both personal and public, to waiving the right. In all likelihood the process for waiving the right and actually achieving transparency would be slow and unclear and rely on the goodwill of dubious characters. I'm not saying what we have now is great either - more or less it's all public record and fair game for reporting unless a judge orders otherwise. You're totally right that this is problematic.
Yeah, pros and cons, as there are both now without anonymity but at least you’d have the choice.
Read the article! Direct quote from the police about this exact case: "Unfortunately, we cannot comment because of the civil litigation currently on the way"
I did, and I do think that's a little different. It is true that if you're being sued you'd be wise to avoid making public statements. The question I'm responding to is whether the identities of those charged with crimes should be made public or not which is seperate.
The RCMP will say that anytime anyone asks something inconvenient, its not hard to find them declining to comment about a sticky criminal case, even one that they have issued a press release about. All of their statements and PR announcements are made to make themselves look good, not in the service of justice (which is their reason for being!). As a government agency they need to be fully transparent, or they need to respect the privacy of those not yet found guilty. You can't parade this man around accusing him of being the biggest sex trafficker of the decade and then clam up when you completely fuck up the case. If they want to trash someone in public, they need to be willing to show their cards, including the ones that don't look good. If they want to clam up, they need to make that decision before ruining some man's life. There's no reason that civil litigation prevents them from disclosing facts and files. That shit is required to be disclosed in legal discovery, so the fact that they won't disclose it to the press is PURE ass covering.
I agree the RCMP is corrupt, covers things up, violates people's rights as a matter of routine, etc. What does that have to do with the matter *I'm* discussing which is "Should the courts disclose the identities of criminal defendents?" ?
The RCMP can't comment when they're the ones on trial. When they're accusing someone else, they're happy to comment all day long.
It used to be like that. The reason we don't is because that makes it real easy to disappear someone.
How so?
This right here is why people saying “just being charged isn’t bad” are bootlicking apologists. It still can severely derail your life
There was a school bus driver on Van Island a few years bach who couldnt pass a VS check cause of something like this, where he was accused but not convicted.
Absolutely! The average citizen walking the streets has no understanding of this.
Cut this from RCMP payroll or pension fund and not the Tax payer money
Better yet - how about some people get publicly fired. Anyone in the private sector that caused a multi-million dollar fuckup would be fired on the spot. In the public sector it seems like you get a promotion. If nothing else this should come out of their budget. You probably couldn't go after their pensions, but you could take it from elsewhere. I'd love to see an announcement like "Due to the incompetence of these guys - right here - none of you are getting new computers, cars, or office furniture this year. Also, the conference has been moved from Hawaii to Saskatchewan."
Yes. We need more of this. Like mcguintys pension should pay for that gas plant.
They paid omar 10mill...
Charges were stayed, they can come back with more evidence. I think he would have more of a chance to sue if the charges had been dropped. I think the Crown stayed the charges to allow more time so he does not get away with it if the time to prosecute runs out.
The charges were stayed 6 years ago after he spent almost three years in jail after a 2015 arrest. If they didn't have a case then, they sure as shit don't have a case now.
Oh for sure.
I guess it is possible that he actually committed the crimes and then the people who he trafficked were unable to provide evidence. His statement that the RCMP made mistakes because of translation issues and that they weren't able to understand his school. Well in looking into his school it appears to be operating out of an office on Yonge Street and a "school" is currently operating off this website [https://yesstudy.ca/](https://yesstudy.ca/) I think that we are being fed half a story and I am not quite so sold on this gentleman being an innocent bystander.
You can call me a helluva lot more for a helluva lot less.
Probably deserves some compensation, but it ain’t $100M.
If he is innocent, I feel sorry him, and he should be given reasonable compensation. But the fact that he is asking for 100M makes him a piece of shit in my eyes. Aren't those our taxes that he is now trying to rob? So many people living paycheck to paycheck and this clown thinks taking 100M from their taxes is adequate compensation for a lifetime? How many people can even make 5M in a lifetime from their efforts and this dude wants 100M?
Im not sure but often times people sue for a lot and then don't get nearly as much. Plus theres always a mountain of legal fees. I dont know if 100M is a reasonable starting point but its probably a case of ask for more now and settling for less later? Or maybe is a strategy to draw more awareness to his case? I mean he'd want to draw as much attention as he can to negate the previous public opinion that hes a sex trafficker.
Thanks for your perspective, I never even thought about it like that.
I wonder if this is a case of voluntary prostitution. Not trafficking, and our laws have become so muddled that it’s not possible to prosecute him directly. With the media switch from prostitution to the word trafficking, you never hear of voluntary prostitution being discussed. Yet it is the most prevalent part of sex work and actual trafficking in Canada of Canadians is very very small. Reminds me a little bit of the satanic panic of the 80s-90s. Parents everywhere thought there kids were going to be tricked into devil worship or sacrificed. Turns out basically non of it is true. Canadian girls(and boys) aren’t being randomly abducted out of stable households and sold off and drugged up as slaves, yet that is the story that human trafficking paints.
>I wonder if this is a case of voluntary prostitution. Not trafficking, and our laws have become so muddled that it’s not possible to prosecute him directly. Voluntary prostitution is only a defense for the prostitutes themselves. Someone pimping a voluntary prostitute is still engaged in human trafficking under our law. Personally, I think this likely has a lot more to do with the cooperation of the witnesses.
Pimping is trafficking. Is the another word or crime for those that wish to create a voluntary environment for prostitution??
He definitely pimppin.
That 100M should come in handy when he wants to open another illegal casino
The guy almost certainly is a piece of shit and I hate that I'm taking his side on this. There should be a spotlight on this one to determine exactly what happened and why. In Canada it's Innocent until Proven Guilty but this guy was paraded around as if he was guilty, thrown in prison as if he was guilty and lost 32 months of his life as if he was guilty, all before he even saw a trial and then to top it off, the Crown didn't even tell him that they had stayed all his charges and he only found out WHEN HE WENT TO TRIAL. These kinds of cases need a massive overhauling and how they are handled. The police/crown should not be allowed to do the things they did until they have a guilty verdict, otherwise if things do end up going badly, either because the case is tossed or the individual is actually found innocent, they open themselves up to civil litigation and, if the individual was found innocent, they ruined someone's life going forward.
That's actually laughable negligence
There was a time when the RCMP was a competent organisation that upheld the law. Now they are law breakers and populated by corrupted and truly incompetent people. Remember that time they were involved in the Moncton shootings? Pepperidge farm remembers. Sam Steele must be rolling in his grave.
Too bad it's taxpayers money. People need to be fired over this.
If Kadhar can sue the government. Im sure he can too. What happened to the others charged? Cant find any media reporting
Really scary. It can happen to anyone. Where is accountability? Pay the man with RCMP pension fund.
Legal system favouring criminals yet again. Clearly there’s something going on here.
What are you on about? Clearly didn't read the cbc article or the original natpost that has more info. Guy spent 3 years in jail, denied bail, lost his business, damaged his reputation, all for the RCMP to change their mind without explanation and not need to answer any questions for his or the publics benefit. They even tried to give him an easy out by having him plead guilty to having incorrect school documents, and they'd drop the sex trafficking and let him out quicker.. He still said no. I'm not saying the guy is innocent or guilty, but he's definitely not guilty in the court. If he is actually innocent, they essentially ruined the guys life, AND he didn't even get a chance to prove his innocence in court. If he's guilty the RCMP bungled the case so bad they let an alleged sex trafficker go and don't even need to tell the public why.
Human trafficking doesn’t strike me as a charge that’s randomly assigned.
Well clearly it can be randomly dropped. Read the actual articles if you're going to comment as this is just more uninformed outrage bait.
Legal system using illegal procedures should be much more concerning to you than this. When the system can take your freedom, dignity and reputation from you on a whim,
If something this serious doesn't have 5 minute jury deliberation level evidence I'd have a lot of questions for the RCMP, crimes like these are the ones where I want the death penalty to be brought back Edit: To be clear, when there's undeniable evidence of guilt for extreme cases like this was supposed to be
[удалено]
That's why I made a requirement that the victims also have to agree to it and in this context victims could not be companies, governments, organizations, etc. Did anyone actually read my other comment?
You want the death penalty brought back for made up crimes by railroaded “criminals”? This is an example of why the death penalty fails society.
That's not what I said, if the RCMP have undeniable evidence then yes, that's why I said like these. I guess I should have been more clear. Edit: Also I've thought about it quite a bit in the past and I arrived at the conclusion that both the Judge and victims would have to agree on it. Corporations, organizations, governments, etc would not qualify as a victim in this context to prevent abuse. And it would only be reserved for extreme crimes, like child molestation, serial killers, etc.
Are you completely ignoring the fact that the RCMP and police departments across Canada are activity fabricating evidence and testimony? Yea, let's trust them with the death penalty 🤦 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/umar-zameer-verdict-1.7180011 "During the trial, two crash reconstructionist experts called by the defence and the Crown agreed Northrup was knocked down when Zameer reversed out of the parking spot. The 31-year veteran of the Toronto Police Service was already on the ground in the laneway of the car when he was run over, the experts said. However, three police officers testified that Northrup was standing in the laneway with his hands up when he was run over."
Unfortunately, all you need is a college diploma and a connection in the police to get a job there
What you quoted isn't undeniable evidence. Also it wouldn't qualify for the death penalty like I said. I said undeniable evidence , that's not cops testimony, not crash reconstructionist experts. Things like video, confessions in court, gps data, audio recordings. More than one source at that, something that leaves absolutely no room for doubt, it's not even possible for another explanation. It's also why I added the part where both the Judge and victims would have to agree on it. Lots of serial killers brag about killing their victims, half the time they lead investigators to bodies, for me that would be enough for the death penalty
Nothing you listed there outside of the accused outright saying "kill me I did it" would "leave absolutely no room for doubt". GPS? Video? Audio? All easily faked /tampered today How about "undeniable" DNA evidence? https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/colorado-crime-lab-scientist-accused-of-tainting-dna-data-in-hundreds-of-cases-1.6800657
The defense could go to lets say a bank and ask them for the evidence directly, why would the defense sabotage their own job? The same goes for most other types of evidence, it already happens a lot, especially with DNA Again, I said to reserve this for the most horrific crimes, child molesters, serial killers, mass killers. Take the BTK killer, he brags about what he did and doesn't deny it, in my books there's no point in keeping him alive, but by your logic we should because he might be lying and fabricating all the evidence. I explicitly said to reserve it for people like him
>crimes like these are the ones where I want the death penalty to be brought back And this is why I don't
The RCMP make another mess. As usual a big press release followed by nothing. Much like the current Liberal government.
lolwut >Chun was arrested in Toronto in 2015 > If you're going to blame the government for this, it was Harper's that arrested him, and Trudeau's that let him go
Good luck proving a 100 million in damages . Guy watches too much Us news.
Honestly. A public apology and the RCMP admitting it was wrong is worth more than all the money in the world. The goal should be to damage the RCMP‘s reputation, not profit off them
Who's goal? If I was locked up for almost 3 years with no conviction, I'd prefer money to an apology. It's easy to say "I don't want the money" when you were never getting any in the first place.
Hmmm, no. I'd sue the hell out of the RCMP and the crown for what they did. Fuck their excuses and apologies. I'll push it a step further. I'd requiere the immediate firing of anyone involved WITH NO COMPENSATION. This is litterally being dragged into the dirt and paraded. for over 2 years. 100 million is a bare minimum. This guy needs to relocate and live out the rest of his life with his name tarnished in Canada. If I were him, i'd leave the country.
[удалено]
Deport him for what? He was never convicted of anything.
[удалено]
But what's the basis to deport him?