Victim Matters. Volume 2, Issue 1, September 2011

“VICTIM MATTERS”
SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2011
VOLUME 2, ISSUE 1
A TRADE JOURNAL
Views – expressed or implied – in Victim Matters are not
necessarily those of the Department of Justice.
Welcome to the September issue of Victim Matters, a publication
of Victims of Violence.
Please share this publication with colleagues and friends, or
have them sign-up to receive it by emailing
[email protected].
IN THIS ISSUE…
VICTIMS VOICE:

LAYING DOWN THE LAW:

Victim Matters would not be possible without Funding from
the Department of Justice Victims Fund.
Department of Justice
Canada
Ministère de la Justice
Canada
TURTLES AND WATCHES
by Susheel Gupta, Canadian Victim of Terrorism
I am writing to you as a victim of terrorism or as someone directly
affected by terrorism in Canada to share some of the experiences of
families affected by the terrorist bombing of Air India Flight 182 on June
23, 1985. For those of you not familiar with this Canadian incident, in
June 1985, two bombs were placed on board two planes leaving from
Canada. One bomb exploded while in transit at Tokyo’s Narita Airport
killing two baggage handlers and the second bomb exploded while the
plane was over the coast of Ireland killing all 329 people on board.
This year marked the 26th anniversary of the bombing of Air India Flight
182. The worst act of terrorism involving Canada. What a terrible 26
years it has been.
I was 12 years old when I woke up one Sunday morning to the sound of
our home phone ringing at about 6:35am. Within minutes, my father told
my big brother and me that our mother was gone. Her plane had crashed
into the Atlantic Ocean. She was dead. The sound of my father’s pain still
echoes in my ears today.
Just the day before, I had been nagging her to make me some Jello, my
favourite dessert, before we departed for the airport to see her off to
India. The last thing she did before we left for the airport was to make
her “little devil” a big bowl of jello and made me promise to be good
while she was away.
I did not understand what my father meant when he told me she
was gone that Sunday. I didn’t really comprehend what death was,
but I somehow understood that I would never see her again. Shortly
afterwards, I left the house and went to deliver my newspapers on
JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY IN
MANITOBA
EXPANDING THE HEADLINES:

THE MANDATORY REPORTING OF MISSING
CHILDREN: CONSIDERING CAYLEE’S LAW
BLAST FROM THE PAST:

VICTIMS VOICE
TURTLES AND WATCHES by SUSHEEL GUPTA
LEGISLATING THE DNA DATABANK
SPOTLIGHT:


PRISCILLA DE VILLIERS: CREATING A SAFER
COMMUNITY
LIFTING BURDENS AND MAKING CHANGES: THE
CANADIAN CRIME VICTIM FOUNDATION
my paper route. I cried the whole hour and a half. Just near our
house is a creek where I sat down along the path. There, I stumbled
upon a turtle, overturned on its back, struggling to get back on its
feet. Being a 12-year old kid, I collected a bunch of rocks with the
intention of throwing them at the turtle. I don’t know why. But, I
never did. I sat there for over a half hour with that turtle. What was
going through my head? I remember clearly.
I sat there thinking to myself, what a horrible world we live in.
Here was a turtle, innocent and vulnerable and through no fault of
its own, stuck in a situation where it needed a hand, but some kid
with no relationship with it was going to hurt it. I thought about all
the people who were in situations living life peacefully, respecting
everyone, just trying to live a good life. I thought of my mother.
Through no fault of her own, with no political leanings, she was
murdered by some strangers in Canada. I decided right then and
there with that turtle that I was not going to be part of that evil,
that I was going to try to be on the side of good for the innocents in
our world. I walked over to the turtle, lifted him up and placed him
on his feet towards the water. I watched as he slowly made his way
back to the creek.
With this epiphany, I got on my bike and went home, feeling angry
but filled with purpose.
Several days later, my father and I were in Ireland. During that trip,
I looked at over 100 dead bodies in the “hopes” that we would
identify her and recover her body. We did! In fact, the last image I
have of my mother is of her lying on a metal table with stitches
Continued on Page 2
Victims of Violence Canadian Centre for Missing Children. 340-117 Centrepointe Drive Ottawa Ontario K2G 5X3 1-888-606-0000
1
running from below her ear, down along to the middle of her chest and
then down further. How far, I don’t know, as we never pulled back the
sheet any further. A few days later, my father and I were in India where
we cremated her body and sent the ashes down the Ganges River, a
holy river in our culture. I remember sitting there alongside for minutes
before I actually lit the fire. My mum’s sisters, her brother, her father
and mother and other family members were all wailing in the
background.
Being the son of an engineer, a child who used to take apart watches
into a hundred pieces and then put them back together, take apart an
electronic toy and then rebuild it, I looked at my Mum and for days and
months afterwards tried to understand death. All I knew was that with
cars, machines and watches, one could take something that was broken,
insert a new part or fix a part, put it back in and make it work again. I
tried to understand, after seeing that my Mum’s body was stitched up
and appeared to all be there, why somebody wasn’t fixing the parts in
her so she would speak and wake up. I never asked anyone about this,
but I dwelled on it internally. It angered and hurt me that no one was
fixing her and making her alive to be my mother again. That is what I
understood of death at 12 years old, seeing her body on that table.
As you can imagine, our family was devastated. My brother went off to
university alone and lost, my father struggled to be both mother and
father for my brother and I, while at the same time he was mourning
the loss of his wife. And I tried to understand what had happened to the
closest person in the world to me, my protector, the one who tucked
me in at night, the one who made me Jello.
That summer I embarked on a course of doing all I could to make my
mother proud. I started volunteering heavily with several community
organizations, worked extra hard in school and did all I could to help my
father at home. I promised myself that for my mother I was going to
work in a field where I could make my country, Canada, safer, healthier
and happier. That turned into my decision to become a lawyer for I
personally believe it speaks to the fact that not only do I, but others can
too, hold great respect for government institutions, even being a victim
of terrorism where there have been no convictions. I could not walk into
a court of law today if I did not have faith in our laws and justice system.
And now I have dedicated myself to serving the public.
I came to Canada when I was four months old. It is my home. I have
great respect for our government, law enforcement and the justice
system. I truly believe these are all the best institutions in the world. I
still believe this today, even after the acquittals of the two accused and
all the mistakes made throughout the case and during the past 26 years.
This being said, there were mistakes that not only impacted those of us
who lost loved ones to this murder, but that impacted all Canadians.
Unfortunately, from the first day of this mass murder, most Canadians
failed to recognize it as a terrorist activity and failed to respond to the
needs of victims’ families. It is only in the few years after the trial where
Justice Josesphson called some of the actions of individual agencies
“unacceptable negligence”. Following the immense public outcry from
families, the media and the public, Canadians have realized the extent
of the poor treatment of the victims’ families. It took the Government of
Canada 20 years to officially recognize this as a Canadian tragedy. The
government did so in June 2005 on the 20th anniversary and Prime
Minister Stephen Harper was the first PM to follow through with a
promise to call for a full judicial inquiry into the Disaster.
our history. That has been hurtful not only to the families but to
the entire country. As a result, we have collectively acted as if
terrorism never happened here. As if we are somehow immune
from the current threat of global terrorism. We always think of
terrorism as happening somewhere else. But terrorism in Canada is
already a fact of life. The sooner we learn from it the better.
Looking again to the events 26 years ago, the grief struck countless
families all over Canada and India. The victims had no time to think
or react. They were blown out of the sky and into the frigid waters
of the Atlantic Ocean. No chance for survival. By this disgusting act
of terrorism, 29 families were completely wiped off the face of the
earth with no living relatives remaining. Thirty-two persons
became single survivors (widows or widowers). Six families lost
their children and 2 children lost both parents. Through no fault of
their own, our loved ones never came home. Our loved ones left us
forever and it was never their intention to do so. The terrorists
involved were certainly cowardly in choosing their victims.
I wondered for years if any of the victims, my mum included, knew
what was happening to them. Sadly, I learned the answer. That
answer is “Yes”. Daniel Brown, a merchant sailor, was in the
vicinity of the bombing site when the plane exploded and helped in
the recovery of bodies. He and I have become very close friends
over the years. He too, is someone I classify as an indirect victim of
terrorism for he spent over 20 years of his life suffering from
trauma relating to what he witnessed that day. Over the years,
Daniel and I have shared our past and cried our hearts out both
describing to each other our memories of the days following the
bombing and how it affected our families.
In 2005, while Daniel and I were doing a radio interview the day
prior to the verdict, Anna-Maria Tremonti of CBC’s The Current
asked Daniel the one question I had been wanting to ask Daniel for
years: “Do you think anyone on the plane knew what had just
happened to them? Daniel responded to Anna-Maria’s question
with a very soft and hesitant “yes, most certainly” as he looked
over at me in the studio. Daniel went on to describe one of the
bodies he had pulled from the ocean that day. It had taken them
several hours to try and recover that one body for it kept slipping
from their hands, all covered in oil. Finally, after getting the dead
person on board their boat, Daniel and fellow shipmate Mark Stagg
looked at the face of the person who had a frozen look of
“screaming”. He died with that look on his face. Daniel described
the look in vivid detail and it was quite apparent that this individual
was alive for a period of time after the bomb exploded and knew
that something dreadful was happening. Then he died. Along with
328 other individuals on this plane like my mum.
This is the face of terrorism victims I hope Canadians will
remember. I want you all to remember the 12 year old boy who
lives with the faces of 130 dead bodies in his head and wakes to
see those faces almost every single night in the middle of his sleep.
Remember the person who died while literally screaming to death.
Remember my mum, that bowl of Jello and the last image I have of
her, the image of her lying dead on a metal table. And, remember
that turtle and how you too can do the right thing even in the face
of a personal tragedy. 
We, as a country have also failed to incorporate this terrorist attack into
Victims of Violence Canadian Centre for Missing Children . VICTIM MATTERS. Volume 2, Issue 1, September/October 2011.
2
LAYING DOWN THE LAW
JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
IN MANITOBA
In June of 2011, A Private Member’s Bill titled The Justice for
Victims of Child Pornography Act was passed in the Province of
Manitoba. As a direct result of the Act coming into effect, the
Manitoba government is now able to sue, in civil court, individuals
who have been involved with the creation, possession, access or
distribution of child pornography. Any money obtained from these
civil suits will go directly to the child(ren) who were victimized by the
offender (when the victim is known) or will go towards assisting
victims of child pornography in other ways, such as by supporting
initiatives to track down and charge offenders who produce,
distribute or posses child sexual abuse images.
With this Bill now in effect, the avenues for obtaining justice for
victims who have endured such a remarkable trauma have been
increased. Manitoba victims are now better able to ensure that they
are compensated for their victimization directly from the person
who harmed them; something that can be even more cathartic then
obtaining compensation from the Manitoba Compensation for
Victims of Crime Program. In cases where the victim is not known,
this piece of legislation allows civil prosecution to proceed
nonetheless because the monies sought will be used to assist in the
recovery of victims and/or the apprehension of other offenders.
These initiatives are most commonly those which are related to
specific police task forces or police units within the province of
Manitoba that are mandated to investigate cases of child
pornography.
Kevin Goertzen, the Progressive Conservative Justice Critic who
introduced this piece of legislation (Bill 220), explained that the
concept for this Bill came to him while attending a conference on
child exploitation that was held in Winnipeg. After this conference
and learning more about the subject, Goertzen met with Beyond
Borders Manitoba Chapter President Rosalind Prober, who is also a
founder of Canada’s national tip line to report online sexual
victimization, Cybertip.ca. Ms. Prober explained that those convicted
of offences relating to child pornography are charged under the
Canadian Criminal Code, but manage to avoid civil prosecution often
because of issues with identifying the individual victims in the
photos. Goertzen, while no stranger to crime-related research, had
never written any articles stressing the urgency to protect children
in relation to sexual exploitation. He felt that after learning what he
had at the conference and by discussing the issue with Ms. Prober,
that this was an issue that needed immediate attention.
After being submitted as a Private Member’s Bill by Goertzen in
2008, Bill 220 was finally approved by the Manitoba NDP
government in 2011. In each of the 3 times the Bill was introduced
during that time period, all members of the Manitoba Legislature
recognized it was an important initiative. When asked why such an
innovative and important Bill took 3 years to finally be approved,
Goertzen replied, “it can be difficult to get a Private Members Bill
by an opposition member passed and... I suppose nothing worth
fighting for comes easy.” Aside from the political pressure that
may have been felt by the opposing parties, it’s important to
recognize that this was universally agreed to as a very important
bill, and one that should have been passed when it was first
submitted.
The purpose of this legislation was to provide compensation to
victims of child pornography, to contribute to a fund which will
help combat the crime, and also provide further deterrence to
those who possess, create and distribute these troubling
images. In addition to these purposes, Goertzen also wanted to
ensure that additional stress was not placed on known victims
by making them pursue civil action within a specific time period.
Understanding the traumatic and sensitive nature of this type of
crime, Goertzen stated that “a specific clause to ensure that
there would be no time limitation on when an action can be
brought” was included in the legislation, and that “time should
never ‘expire’ on the ability to bring justice on this type of
horrific crime.”
In circumstances where the victim is not known, once an
offender has been convicted and sentenced, the Crown
prosecutor can immediately state that they would like to move
to sue the offender for a monetary amount consistent with the
crime that they have committed. Once this motion has been
made, the Crown may call on expert witnesses, cite evidence
from the trial, and/or refer to precedent (once this Act has been
used) to influence the court in deciding what an appropriate
monetary amount consistent with the seriousness of the
offence would be.
While this legislation is currently only existent in the province of
Manitoba, Goertzen feels that, “other provinces will look at this
legislation and move to adopt something similar in their areas.”
Undeniably, victims in all provinces should have as many
opportunities to seek justice as possible and police investigative
units should receive funds when the victim is not known to
assist with the high level of financial costs that capturing these
types of criminals requires. The Justice for Victims of Crime Act
is clearly a positive piece of legislation for victims and the
province of Manitoba has definitely developed this law with
victims in mind.
For more information and to view the actual text of this bill,
please visit http://web2.gov.mb.ca/bills/39-5/b220e.php. 
“I never escape the fact that pictures of my
abuse are out there forever. Everything possible should
be done to stop people looking at pictures of child abuse.
Each time someone looks at pictures of me, it’s like
abusing me again.”
16 year old victim of child pornography
Victims of Violence Canadian Centre for Missing Children . VICTIM MATTERS. Volume 2, Issue 1, September/October 2011.
3
“WE PROVED THAT ORDINARY PEOPLE
CAN COME TOGETHER TO MOVE
MOUNTAINS AND CHANGE LAWS”
-
VICTIM MATTERS
SEPTEMBER /OCTOBER 2011
VOLUME 2, ISSUE 1
Priscilla De Villiers
SPOTLIGHT
PRISCILLA DE VILLIERS: CREATING A SAFER
COMMUNITY
In 1991, the most horrific thing that could happen to a parent
became a reality for Priscilla de Villiers. Her daughter, Nina, was
murdered. Nina was jogging in Burlington, ON when she was
abducted and murdered by Jonathon Yeo. Yeo, a repeat offender
who had a long history of both violent and non-violent offences,
tried to leave the country shortly before murdering Nina. He was
stopped by a US customs officer who reported that the man
seemed dangerous and had a firearm. However, while the officer
did not let Yeo enter the United States, he did not feel that he had
a right to separate Yeo from his weapon even though he was in
violation of his bail. The officer then allowed him to return freely
back to Canada. One hour later, Yeo abducted Nina and killed her
using the same rifle he tried to enter the United States with.
Since the murder of her daughter, Pricilla de Villiers has tirelessly
campaigned and advocated for victims rights and for positive
changes to the justice system. Soon after the death of her
daughter, Priscilla and Rocco de Villiers along with M.P. Beth
Phinney, launched a national petition that urged the government
to “recognize that crimes of violence against the person are
serious and abhorrent to society and amend the Criminal Code of
Canada, the Bail Reform Act of 1972, and the Parole Act
accordingly.” This petition, which almost 3 million people had
signed before it was closed, is something that Priscilla is very
proud of and cites it as one of her main accomplishments. She
stated that it gave “people a say, they could talk to parliament
and parliament was going to listen.” Indeed, the petition was
presented to then Justice Minister Allan Rock, and Priscilla and
Rocco were to later meet with Prime Minister Jean Chretien to
discuss the petition and their concerns about the safety of their
community.
What further drove Priscilla to advocate for victims was that after
the death of her daughter people starting calling and writing to
her about similar experiences of how the justice system had failed
them or their loved ones. Indeed the number of people who
approached her and told her about how unsafe they felt, and the
high number of girls disappearing or being murdered around the
time that her daughter had died, were a few of the reasons why
Priscilla thought that the petition was a good idea. Soon after the
phone calls and letters, victims and concerned members of the
community began to send money to support Priscilla in her
advocacy.
Through her involvement with CAVEAT and in her own
capacity, Priscilla has been part of many groups, councils, and
conferences, and has been called as an expert on victim’s
issues throughout her career, all of which has helped to
improve the situation for victims in Canada and/or worked to
prevent crime. Some of these involvements include holding
three day national SafetyNet conferences, which develop
recommendations to be presented to all levels of government
regarding things such as victim’s rights, young offenders,
parole reform, high-risk offenders, child protection, as well as
many other topics; meeting with justice officials to discuss
improvement in the flow of information between the police,
Crown, and courts, corrections, and parole; supported the
repeal of Section 745 of the Criminal Code; and made
submissions to the government from a victim’s perspective on
topics such as sentencing, victim’s rights, gun control, the
Young Offenders Act (now known as the Youth Criminal Justice
Act) and high risk and dangerous offenders. Priscilla has also
been a member of the National Crime Prevention Council, and
sits on the Board of Directors of Ottawa Victim Services.
From 2001 to 2005, Priscilla was appointed Special Advisor to
the Ontario Office for Victims of Crime, where she wrote a
complete report about the role of victims in restorative justice
in Ontario. She has also received numerous awards, most
notably the Meritorious Service Medal, from the GovernorGeneral of Canada in 1996. The experience of receiving this
award was something that Priscilla felt was very confirming of
her work because she didn’t even know the person who had
nominated her. “It felt very good to know that someone I
hadn’t met before saw that what was being done for victims
was worthy of such as award,” she stated. Priscilla has also
been given an honorary Doctorate of Law degree from
McMaster University for her work regarding changes and
improvements to the Canadian Justice System.
Throughout her years as a victims advocate, Priscilla has also
learned many valuable lessons that will stay with her for the
rest of her life. First and foremost was that “ordinary people
could come together and move mountains and change laws as
a group of concerned citizens.” Priscilla stated that neither she
nor many of the people that advocated alongside her were
extraordinary when they began to advocate, but as a group
they were able to do many extraordinary things for victims and
the justice system. One of the things that proved this
particular point was the success of the petition that she and
Rocco had started. Priscilla stated that the amount of people
that signed it was very inspiring for her and taught her that
Continued on Page 5
It was due to the amount of people that were coming forward, the
amount of financial support that she was receiving from the
Victims
of Violence
Canadian
Centre
for Missing
VICTIM
community,
and the
number
of people
that Children.
were signing
her MATTERS. Volume 2, Issue 1, September/October 2011.
petition, that Priscilla and a group of concerned friends decided to
found the organization CAVEAT (Canadians Against Violence
4
“WHAT WE REALLY NEED IS TO HAVE IT
ENTRENCHED IN OUR EDUCATION AND OUR DAILY
ACTIVITIES THAT CRIME, PARTICULARLY VIOLENT
CRIME, IS JUST NOT A PART OF OUR SOCIETY.
THAT IT’S AN INTOLERABLE PART OF OUR SOCIETY”
-
VICTIM MATTERS
Priscilla de Villiers
“using the avenues available to you is one of the smartest and
best ways to make change.” While it is true that Priscilla's
accomplishments have taught her invaluable lessons, the
challenges she has faced have also help her to grow and become
the advocate she is today. She stated that “overcoming the
entrenched idea [within the justice system] that victims are just
out for revenge, that they have no say in the justice system, and
that they have no role” was one of her greatest challenges,
something that she is still trying to change in the eyes of many
judicial parties today. She explained that things have definitely
improved since the time of her daughter’s murder, but that “they
still have a long way to go.”
On May 31, 2001 CAVEAT closed its doors after 10 years of service.
CAVEAT, an organization that focused on changes in legislation, on
education and prevention, and on victim’s rights, was instrumental
in raising the profile of victims’ issues in Canada and in bringing
advocacy organizations together with police and policy makers. The
organization had a profound impact on the progress achieved for
victims of crime during their decade of service.
Priscilla has been able to make many positive and progressive
changes to the justice system regarding how it treats both victims
and offenders, has been able to overcome many challenges, and
has been called on many times to share a victims perspective with
various institutions and government bodies. She will continue to
advocate and help victims in the future, and has stated that the
next area that she would like to explore is to discover the true
costs of crime and how homicide affects siblings of victims.
In fact, Priscilla has begun to work with Dr. Susan Tasker at the
University of Victoria on a study regarding what siblings of
homicide victims need in terms of resources, how their brother or
sister’s homicide has effected them, and generally what sort of
lives and experiences do they go on to have. The purpose of this
study is to create an awareness of brothers and sisters as
secondary victims of homicide, and also to help support the need
for change in policy and practice. Priscilla described the study
itself as being a very simple and short online survey in which
participants complete questions by clicking on options while
having the opportunity to add their own notes and thoughts after
each question. The study is completely confidential and no names
of participants are ever known. Participants can take as much
time as they need to answer the questions, and can also stop and
start as often as necessary, but most should be able to finish
within an hour or two. Priscilla has asked that if any brothers or
sisters of homicide victims would like to participate in this study,
to contact her at [email protected] or
1.905.634.1819.
If you would like to know more about Priscilla and her work,
please visit the CAVEAT website at http://www.caveat.org/.
Priscilla de Villiers, founding
member of CAVEAT
BLAST FROM THE PAST
LEGISLATING A DNA DATABANK
In 1996, a consultation process regarding the establishment
of a national DNA data bank began throughout Canada. This
eventually would culminate in the establishment of
legislation in 1998 and the opening of the first National DNA
Data Bank on June 30, 2000.
DNA analysis had first been used by the RCMP in 1989 in an
investigation where a suspect denied involvement in a sexual
assault, but the victim identified him as the attacker. A DNA
analysis later confirmed the victim’s identification of the
suspect. When the DNA test results were presented in court,
the suspect changed his plea to guilty.
Continued on Page 6
Victims of Violence Canadian Centre for Missing Children. 340-117 Centrepointe Drive Ottawa, Ontario K2G 5X3
1-888-606-0000
5
At this early stage of DNA use there was no central coordination
at the national level that could help police take full advantage of
the unfolding advances in DNA technology. In 1995, the Canadian
Criminal Code was amended to add DNA warrant provisions.
Under these provisions, a provincial court judge could authorize
the collection of DNA from a suspect for the purpose of forensic
DNA analysis in the course of the police investigation of a Criminal
Code offence. However, in order for this new tool to be used to
its full potential, there was a need for coordination of DNA
profiling data across the country. With support from all levels of
government, the general public and police agencies throughout
Canada, decisive steps were taken to create the National DNA
Data Bank.
In 1996, (what was then known as) the Department of the
Solicitor General, and the Department of Justice undertook
Canada-wide consultations regarding the establishment of a
national DNA data bank. The Provinces and territories, as well as
Police associations, Privacy officials, Bar associations, Victim
advocates, Correctional officials and Medical and scientific
organizations were involved in these consultations, which resulted
in the first piece of legislation to establish a databank being
introduced in April of 1997 as Bill C-94. This bill died on the Order
Paper when Parliament was dissolved in April 1997.
In September of 1997 Bill C-94 was re-introduced in the House
of Commons as Bill C-3 on September 25, 1997.
Bill C-3 would provide the legal framework to regulate the storage
and, in some cases, the collection of DNA data and the biological
samples from which they have been derived. In addition to
creating an entirely new Act that provided for the structure and
administration of a national DNA Data Bank, Bill C-3 would amend
the Criminal Code to expand the courts’ authority to order the
collection of biological samples for testing. The resulting database
would be maintained by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and
used to assist Canadian law enforcement agencies in the
investigation of serious crimes. At first reading, Bill C-3 was almost
identical to the former Bill C-94, which had died on the Order
Paper earlier that year.
Bill C-3 went on to receive Royal Assent on December 10, 1998
and was proclaimed in force on June 30, 2000. The mandate from
Parliament included a requirement to have the National DNA Data
Bank operational within 18 months of Royal Assent.
Based on recommendations by the Senate, Bill C-3 would later be
amended by Bill S-10. S-10 included modifications for taking
fingerprints for identification purposes, inclusion of designated
offenders convicted in the military justice system, and a full
legislative review after five years, to be conducted by the Senate
and the House of Commons. June 30, marked the Royal Assent of
Bill S-10 and proclamation of Bills C-3 and S-10. DNA sample
collections commenced immediately following proclamation. 
EXPANDING THE HEADLINES
THE MANDATORY REPORTING OF MISSING
CHILDREN: CONSIDERING CAYLEE’S LAW
In 2008, one of the most publicized criminal cases in recent
history began with the death of 2 year old Caylee Anthony in
the state of Florida. Over the process of the investigation into
this young girl’s death, police determined her mother, Casey
Anthony to be their number one suspect and subsequently
charged her with murder. Through the processes of the
justice system and after hearing all evidence available, a jury
acquitted her of that charge as well as of manslaughter and
child abuse, but found her guilty of four counts of misleading
law enforcement.
One of the most concerning facts about this case was that
Casey Anthony waited 31 days to report her daughter missing,
and even then, it was her mother who pushed her to go to the
police. This act (or rather omission) caused the general public
to react with “Caylee’s Law” after Casey Anthony was
acquitted. “Caylee’s Law” began as a petition by Michelle
Crowder, a mother of two from Oklahoma, who stated that
there needs to be a law which forces parents to report their
child missing within a certain period of time. Since her
petition was posted, almost 1.3 million people in the United
States have signed it and twenty-six states have displayed
interest in developing the law. Caylee’s Law would make it a
felony offence for a parent or legal caretaker to fail to report
a missing child within a certain time period, along with failing
to report a deceased child within a certain period of time.
While the exact time limits very slightly from state to state,
most propose a 24 hour window for a missing child, and a 1
hour window for children who are discovered deceased.
Essentially, the proposed law was meant to fill a gap in the
justice system that was exposed in the Casey Anthony trial.
Supporters of this legislation, such as State Senator Bill
Ketron of Tennessee, made comments such as “abandoning a
child is illegal. Abuse is illegal. So the question is whether
failing to report a toddler missing for 31 days equates to
abuse, neglect and endangerment and should be treated as a
felony offense. I believe it does.”Furthermore, Paul
Wesselhoft, an Oklahoma legislator, stated that “any delay
could endanger the life of the child and, in the case of a child's
death, make it that much harder to collect evidence" as
reasons to support Caylee’s Law-type legislation. In the state
of Okalahoma, if Wesselhoft’s legislation is passed, parents
would have 24 hours to report the death of a child and 48
hours to report a missing child under the age of 12.
Caylee’s Law has gained much support since Anthony was
acquitted. In Canada, the public has also voiced support of
Continued on Page 7
Victims of Violence
WWW.VICTIMSOFVIOLENCE.ON.CA
1-888-606-0000
6
this type of legislation via online petitions and social media
networks such as Facebook. For example, Ottawa citizen Kenneth
McGrath started a facebook page encouraging people to talk to
their local members of parliament about implementing a “Caylee’s
Law” in Canada. He stated that “regardless of Ms. Anthony’s
mental health, there should have been a law in place to protect
Caylee from the negligence associated with not reporting her
missing… I think that the principle benefit of such a law in Canada
would be to protect the interests of children by making the
custodial parent legally responsible for reporting them missing
within a specific period of time.”
Currently, in Canada, there are no laws specifying a time period in
which a parent or caregiver must report a missing or deceased
child. Perhaps the closest legislation is that of the provincial family
laws pertaining to “abandoning a child” or “failing to provide the
necessities of life” but these laws do not specifically state a time
period in which a report must be made, and do not necessarily
apply to cases of missing children. For example, in the British
Columbia Child, Family, and Community Service Act, it is stated
that if a person discovers that a child has been abandoned they
must “promptly” report it to the proper authorities, but there is no
indication of what constitutes “promptly” and there is no specific
provision which states that failing to report a child missing means
that they have been legally abandoned (although, in some cases
this may constitute child abuse under this Act.)
Introducing laws such as Caylee’s Law seems to be an obvious step
in the right direction for preventing parents from failing to report
their missing children, but there are some who are weary to say
that the law would have made a difference in little Caylee`s fate.
Wendy Christensen, the manager of the investigative unit from the
Missing Children’s Society of Canada stated that the verdict in the
Anthony case “had an adverse effect” on her and others who
followed the case, but that a law like Caylee’s Law “wouldn’t really
have helped in this case, or for people like her [Casey Anthony].”
She stated that if this law is passed “and it prevents one case… and
it holds parents to a higher standard [of ensuring the safety of
their children] than it is a good thing.” However, she explained
that cases such as the Anthony case are so rare, questions like “is
it a real problem, are people doing this on a regular basis?”need to
be asked and answered before implementing it. This was a
concern that Niamh Harraher of the organization Justice for
Children and Youth also cited. Niamh stated that “the drafters of
this legislation do not seem to be pointing to a host of other cases
like the case of Caylee [or that] failures to report when a child is
missing or has died are a widespread problem that requires
legislative reform.” Indeed, Wendy stated that in order for a law
like that to work, we would have to be aware of the potential for a
“ripple effect” on to innocent parents who are simply too
overcome with grief to report their deceased child immediately, or
for those parents who do their own searches for a day or two prior
to notifying police. Wendy stated that “a great deal of discretion
would be needed” if Canada was to implement a similar law.
Victims of Violence
Wendy’s comments begin to shed some light on the issues
surrounding Caylee’s Law. Indeed, there are many people who
feel that such a law is unnecessary and may actually hinder
the justice system. Their concerns are mainly based around
the cut off times for reporting a missing or deceased child. In
an article in the Huffington Post, reporter Radley Balko
discusses a number of scenarios in which a parent may not
report a child missing or deceased within those time frames
for completely logical and acceptable reasons. For example,
he states that there are particular problems with the one-hour
requirement for deceased children; “what if a child dies while
sleeping? When would you start the clock on the parent's
one-hour window to report? From the time the parent
discovers the child is dead, or from the time the child actually
dies? If it's the former, can you really believe what a parent
tells you if he knows a felony charge hinges on his answer?”
Others have also found problems with this type of legislation,
such as American attorney Jeff Deen who explained that
Caylee’s Law was not a good idea because “the potential
abuse of that law in a divorce case (for example) where
people are fighting over their kids and they’re delivered home
late on a visitation … is going to have the police responding to
hundreds of bogus phone calls.” It is possible to think of many
other scenarios where parents may get caught up in this law,
even though their intentions may have been completely
honest. For example, as was also described in a Huffington
Post article, what if a child gets lost while on a hiking trip and
a parent doesn’t notice for a few hours, then spends a few to
look for him or her before they begin to be truly alarmed.
Should they stay and continue to look for him or her? If they
do they would then miss the 24 hour reporting deadline.
Should they then abandon their child in the woods?
It is true that Caylee’s Law is meant to single out people like
Casey Anthony who fail to report their child missing or
deceased for an excessive period of time. However, laws apply
to everyone equally and are impartial in their very nature.
Thus, if a 24 hour deadline were put in place, and a mother
reported her child missing after 30 hours, she would be
subjected to the same consequences as if she had not
reported for child missing after 30 days. Perhaps there may be
aggravating and mitigating circumstances that would adjust
the amount of jail time or fine that she was given, but she
would be a felon nonetheless. It will be important to listen to
the arguments and analyze the evidence presented during the
debates early next year when the next legislative session
begins. 
For more information about Caylee’s Law, please visit:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/11/caylees-law-casey-anthony_n_893953.html
http://www.change.org/petitions/create-caylees-law
http://www.okhouse.gov/okhousemedia/news_story.aspx?NewsID=4055
WWW.VICTIMSOFVIOLENCE.ON.CA
1-888-606-0000
7
“IT SHOULD BE OUR BIRTH RIGHT TO BE TREATED
HUMANELY AND COMPASSIONATELY WHEN WE HAVE BEEN
VIOLATED; IT SHOULD BE THE 1ST DUTY OF THE
GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT ITS CITIZENS AGAINST
VIOLENCE, ESPECIALLY LOCAL VIOLENCE.”
-
VICTIM MATTERS
Joe Wamback speaking about his ultimate goal of having
victim’s rights entrenched into the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms.
SPOTLIGHT
LIFTING BURDENS AND MAKING CHANGES:
THE CANADIAN CRIME VICTIM FOUNDATION
The Canadian Crime Victim Foundation was formed in 2002
by Joe and Lozanne Wamback, whose son was attacked and
nearly killed in 1999 by a group of young offenders. When
their son was attacked, the Wambacks found themselves
dealing with victim services that were grossly understaffed,
underfunded, and were sporadic at best. Seeing the state of
affairs that victim services across Canada were in, they felt
that they needed to help to change that situation.
Originally the CCVF was meant to be a foundation to help
families pay for funeral costs, travel costs, lost wages, and
other financial burdens placed on them through no fault of
their own. Unfortunately, the Wambacks soon discovered
that the Canada Revenue Agency would not allow them to
give money to victims unless they were “financially destitute”
and met a certain income criteria. To overcome this, the
Wambacks decided to change the CCVF from a “foundation”
to an “organization” that awards scholarships to victims and
families of victims. The scholarships are awarded to those
graduating high school and who have demonstrated
participation in anti-violence and/or anti-bullying initiatives,
who have generally shown a consistent and positive
contribution to their peers, school staff, and their community.
In addition to providing funding and scholarships in order to
assist individual victims, the CCVF has also spoken to more
then 40,000 students about violence and bullying, and how
the victims of these behaviours are affected. The Wamback’s
son, Jonathon, often participates in these presentations and
uses his experience to really reach the students and explain
the effects that their actions can have on others when they
bully or otherwise violate another person. Furthermore, the
CCVF also works to educate police officers and front line staff
on victim needs, and assists investigative officers (with the
consent of the victim) with minimizing re-victimization and
helps them in providing appropriate crisis intervention,
counselling, follow up, criminal injuries compensation, trial
assistance, and referrals to appropriate community agencies.
Essentially, the CCVF promotes client-centred victim services
and does its best to provide equal access for all victims of
crime to the services available (remove lingual, financial,
social barriers, ect.) Their goal is to ultimately have an equal
standard of these services and rights for victims all across
Canada.
There are four accomplishments that the CCVF, and the
Wambacks, are particularly proud of. First, the CCVF has been
able to raise awareness of victim’s rights, as well as the plight
of victims in the justice system, and has made real progress in
changing people’s views about how victims should be treated
by that system. They have done this mainly through their
“Speakers Bureau” program. Through this program, the
Wambacks as well as other survivors of violent crime, speak
to key steakholders, political leaders, victim advocates,
schools and other agencies about victim’s rights issues and
youth violence.
The second major accomplishment that the CCVF is proud of
is that they have been both directly and indirectly responsible
for the change or implementation of eleven criminal law
measures. In particular, Joe Wamback states that their
involvement with the initiation of changes to the Employment
Insurance Act was one of the most progressive things that
they have been able to do. By initiating these changes, which
most notably consisted of allowing family members of
homicide victims to receive certain benefits, the CCVF was
successful in ensuring that employers understand the
psychological and emotional impacts that homicide and
violent crime can have on the family members of victims.
The third achievement is particularly unique to the CCVF, as it
is in regard to their ability to providing scholarships and grants
to victims of extreme violence. The CCVF provides financial
assistance to those victims who would otherwise have had
difficulty paying for certain expenses, such as a higher level of
education, but also (in some circumstances) for things such as
funerals or crime scene clean up. The CCVF can provide up to
$25,000 to students who have had a loved one (usually a
brother or sister) fall victim to homicide or extreme violence.
This is something that is especially important to the
Wambacks because they are too well aware that victims and
survivors are often financially unstable after experiencing
extreme violence or homicide, and that the financial avenues
available to them after experiencing a violent victimization
are often limited.
Continued on Page 9
Victims of Violence.
VICTIM MATTERS.
Volume 2, Issue 1, September/October 2011.
8
The fourth, but certainly not last, aspect of their organization
that the CCVF is particularly proud of as it is genuinely unique to
the organization, is the initiation of and funding of Canada’s first
and only research that focuses specifically on the issues those
box or enter
quote
tagline here.
families ofDelete
victimsthis
of extreme
violence
andorhomicide
face. This
program, which has given $25,000 to the University of British
Columbia and $50,000 to York University in Toronto, supports
researchers and academic searching for answers to questions
such what are the effects of homicide on siblings and parents
(the CCVF is funding the study that Priscilla de Villiers is assisting
with, mentioned earlier in this issue), what can be done to help
victims cope most effectively, as well as a wide range of other
study topics. The CCVF will use the data from this research to
“provide meaningful recommendations for changing social policy
in relation to homicide and violence,” stated Joe Wamback.
VICTIM MATTERS
After discovering the amount of money that the CCVF awards in
scholarships and grants, it is often hard for most people to
fathom where the organization gets all of the funds to do so. The
answer is almost equally as hard to imagine: the large majority
of the money that the CCVF awards to recipients is fundraised by
the Wambacks themselves. Joe Wamback states that he himself
has volunteered tens of thousands of his personal hours to
fundraising for this purpose since starting the organization.
When people ask him why he does it, why he continues to put in
so many hours of non-paid work, he response is simple: “how
can you not do it?... I couldn’t just stand by and watch it happen
to another child when I know I can help.” And Joe will continue
to do it. He stated that the organization still has much work to
do to reach its goals and better the situation for victims, even
though much progress has already been made.
One of the main things that the CCVF would like to see happen is
the entrenchment of victims rights into the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms. Joe states that only when this happens
will victims “be truly equal to offenders” in terms of their
guaranteed rights. In order to do this however, Joe states that
“changes need to be made across the country, and the
resistance the CCVF has faced by the legal community and from
party politics needs to be overcome” in order for them to move
forward.
The Canadian Crime Victim Foundation is a unique organization
that provides unique services and opportunities to victims and
the general public across Canada. By awarding scholarships and
research grants, the CCVF enables victims and those with an
interest in helping victims in pursuing their goals, whether it be
achieving a higher education, or using their education to
accurately and positively make changes that will benefit victims.
By speaking to the community and various professionals about
victim issues and the effects of violence on others, the CCVF is
also helping to form new attitudes (although not without
resistance) among Canadians, and teaching them about how to
more adequately support those who have been burdened
emotionally, physically and financially through no fault of their
own. 
Victims of Violence
For more information about the Canadian Crime Victim
Foundation, please visit http://www.ccvf.net/.
Q&A: RESPONDING TO WHAT
MATTERS TO YOU
Q. Can you please advise if there is a Dangerous
Offenders List available to the general public?
– Marie from Mississauga
A. To help answer this question, we talked to Don Wadel,
Executive Director of the John Howard Society of Ottawa,
and as well as Christina Guest, a senior policy analyst from
the Correctional Service of Canada.
Don explained that, being sentenced as a dangerous
offender can only occur when it has been shown through
evidence, that the offender constitutes as a continuing
danger to society through unreceptive changes in his/her
behaviour. Unlike the national sex offender registry, no list
exists entailing all dangerous offenders currently serving a
sentence.
Christina confirmed that there was no list in existence. She
explained that the “designation of Dangerous Offenders is
imposed by the judge at sentencing. As criminal sentences
are on public record, a concerned citizen could obtain the
record of an offender’s conviction from the court at which
he or she was sentenced in order to ascertain whether or
not the Dangerous Offender designation was imposed.”
Additionally, Don further explained that one could find out
if a person was a dangerous offender by searching media
as well. He stated that because the dangerous offender
designation would be made in open court and available for
the public to hear and see, it would also have likely been
reported in newspapers or on the radio or television news
channel.
The reasoning behind why no such list exists is because it
would, in essence, provide unnecessary practicality. Don
explains this by stating that the rational for a sex offender
registry, for example, is to help police investigate and
improve their abilities surrounding crimes of a sexual
nature. A dangerous offender list would not contribute to
police investigations, and would simply be viewed as a list
of names and numbers. Thus, one must rely on the
information published in news articles and heard on radio
and television news in order to know who in their
community is considered a continuous threat. 
Have a question you’d like to see answered in the next issue?
Email us at: [email protected].
WWW.VICTIMSOFVIOLENCE.ON.CA
1-888-606-0000
9
According to Public Safety Canada, as of July 2006,
there were 351 active offenders with the Dangerous
Offender designation. Of this group, 18 had received parole
and 333 were currently still incarcerated.
A STATISTICAL LOOK AT POLICE REPORTED CRIME
On July 21, 2011, Statistics Canada released a report which detailed
crime as it is reported to the police. Statistics Canada based the
numbers of this report on data obtained from 2.1 million Criminal
Code incidents that were reported by police services across Canada
in 2010, a number that was 77,000 fewer than the previous year.
The report stated that the police reported crime rate was continuing
on its downward trend, which had had begun in the early 1990’s.
This decline was marked by a 5% decrease in the total number of
incidences, and the level of severity of all incidences was 6% lower
than that of 2009.
There were declines noted in both violent and non-violent
crime, with decreases in property crimes accounting for the
majority of the overall decrease in crime rate. Crimes such as
homicide, attempted murder, serious assaults and robbery also
showed substantial decreases. In fact, the rate of homicide in
2010 (1.62 per 100,000 people) was the lowest since 1966. For
the past decade, homicide rates have been relatively stable, but
from 2009-2010 there was a significant drop of approximately
10%. Attempted homicide rates also feel dramatically in 2010 to
693 incidences, the lowest rate in over 30 years.
While the crime incidence and severity rate has indeed been
declining for the past two decades, some specific crimes have
been increasing. It was reported by Statistics Canada that
offences such as sexual assault, use/discharge of a firearm,
criminal harassment, child pornography and drug offences did
COMMENTS OR FEED BACK? IDEAS?
show some increases. Sexual assault had the highest increase
at 5%, the first time this crime has increased since 2005.
Furthermore, crimes committed by youths declined overall by
7%, and the severity of their crimes was also decreasing,
although it was still 5% higher than that which was reported in
2000.
Nunavut, the Northwest Territories, and Saskatchewan,
followed by Manitoba and British Columbia, reported the
highest rates of crime severity. The lowest severity rates were
seen in Ontario, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick.
Across Canada, this report stated that the provinces and
territories that had the lowest crime rates were Alberta and
British Columbia, with the rate falling 6% in each province since
2009. Across the major metropolitan areas in Canada, the level
of crime either fell or remained constant, however, St. John’s,
Sudbury, and Peterborough, all saw increases in the severity of
crimes that were reported to the police. Guelph, Quebec City,
Toronto, and Ottawa were shown to have the lowest levels of
crime severity.
It is important to remember that while these statistics can
provide valuable insight into the reality of crime in Canada, this
information may be slightly flawed. Because not all crimes are
reported to police for various reasons, one should examine
these statistics while also keeping in mind the findings of the
General Social Survey on Victimization (the most recent one
was released last year). This survey does not rely solely on
police reported statistics, but instead asks questions of the
Canadian population directly. 
To view the report on police reported crime statistics, please visit
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/110721/dq110721beng.htm. To view the most recent GSS on victimization, please
visit: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/dailyquotidien/100928/dq100928a-eng.htm
LINKS OF INTEREST
SEND US YOUR THOUGHTS TO:
[email protected]

POLICY CENTRE FOR VICTIM ISSUES
www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/pcvi-cpcv/index.html
Tell your story: Make a submission for

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
www.justice.gc.ca
Have a question?
Email us and have it answered in the next issue.

CAVEAT
www.caveat.org

CANADIAN CRIME VICTIM FOUNDATION
www.ccvf.net

SIBLING OF YOUNG HOMICIDE VICTIMS STUDY
www.gvpvs.org/web/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/UVICResearch-23Sept2010t.pdf
VICTIMS VOICE.
VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE
340 – 117 CENTREPOINTE DRIVE,
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
K2G 5X3
“Go Paperless” If you have received this publication in paper format and would prefer
to receive it by e-mail, please send us a quick e-mail to the address above.
Victims of Violence Canadian Centre for Missing Children. VICTIM MATTERS. Volume 2, Issue 1, September/October 2011.
10