Now this is some fucked up shit right here...

[crazy canuck]

Naw, prior to 2003 I was enforcing judgments from American Courts in Canada with no problem at all.  In BC it was done pursuant to legislation which recognized the reciprocal enforcement treaty.  The only way to avoid the enforcement was if the judgment of the US court applied a legal principle foreign to Canadian law - the test was more nuanced but that was, and is, the gist of it.  The real and substantial connection test for registering a foreign judgment absent a treaty has always been the test iirc.  Not sure why it was an issue in that case.

Clearly, that was something specific to that province. Each province did it differently.

The real and substantial connection test applied as between provinces. It was only assumed to apply internationally, until the Supremes said it did in this case.

What that case did, was eliminate the need for local solutions (or presumptions) by dragging the whole country into the modern era - in 2003. That archaic stuff about "attornment" being the assumed state was discarded.

Yeah, reading the case more closely it appears Ontario was going its own way prior to that decision.

[Barrister]

Para 40 made me think the court had seen him before and that a reassessment was done, but I'll confess that I don't quite grasp the chronology, so yield to your expertise.  In any case, you provided the missing link as far as I am concerned.

Para 40 talks about a pre-sentence report (PSR).  It's a not uncommon procedure in our courts.  Once a guilty plea has been accepted (or a finding of guilt after trial) the judge adjourns sentencing so the PSR can be prepared.  It gives some background information about the offender, prepared by a probation officer.

So "the court" had seen this youth before on an earlier date, but on the same set of charges.

[Barrister]

Does Canadian law have provisions in where the kid can't use a modem or x number of years?

You can place the kid on probation and put almost any term you could imagine on there.

"no access to the internet" is pretty harsh both in terms of effect, and pretty tough to enforce, however.

[Barrister]

Does Canadian law have provisions in where the kid can't use a modem or x number of years?

Does Canada have the same kind of "clean slate" treatment of juvenile vs. adult criminal records as the US does?  That would be one issue- upon reaching adulthood, how do you enforce the juvenile judgment?  Also, the article mentioned he was already in the system and not supposed to be using the Internet without supervision (the more we put school- and work-necessary content online- and I'll bet Canada already puts more online than the US, the less likely we are to be able to put a blanket ban on its use).

If you go conviction-free for a set number of years (depending on the types of youth charges) your youth record is expunged automatically.  But if you get nailed with even a minor criminal offence, say shoplifting, then your entire youth record stays with you forever (barring a pardon).

[Barrister]

Here's the actual case decision, though in some ways the NYT article gives more detail.

http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcpc/doc/2015/2015bcpc203/2015bcpc203.html

Fun fact - the 16 months custody is actually the youth maximum, since the max is two years and only two thirds can be spent in detention (the remaining third must be in the community).

Also the judge references s. 39 of the YCJA, but he doesn't meaningfully address s. 39(1) which states a judge SHALL NOT sentence to custody unless he has committed a violent offence, or has failed to comply with non-custodial sentences (impossible, since he's never been before the courts), or in other exceptional cases.  He was charged with extortion, so perhaps that's how they get the "violent offence" designation, but it might be a stretch.

Thanks.  That's a lot more informative, and makes it clearer that this was no mere "slap on the wrist."  Also, that the kid had appeared before courts before for this kind of behavior.

You da man.

Thank you for your kind words.  It isn't often that the Canadian criminal justice system gets discussed on languish, so when it does I like to show off.

This kid though had never been before the court.  See para 64.

This is the toughest sentence the court could impose.  Doesn't mean I don't think it was a whole lot more than a "slap on the wrist" though.  But there's a reason they don't send me to youth court...

How long could the sentence be if he was tried if he was an adult? Or if he re-offends after he is 18?

Extortion carries a maximum adult penalty of life imprisonment.

HOWEVER...

when the maximum is life it's a practical impossibility to get it as a sentence for non-homicide cases.  These are pretty unique and horrible facts - I have no idea what an adult in a similar situation would receive for a sentence.  An adult would also have much greater incentive to fight these sorts of charges tooth and nail.