Posted By: EddieCoyle
Canada Getting Tough On Gangsters - 07/11/12 09:12 PM
Interesting things are happening, especially for a country that has long been seen as soft on Organized crime (one of the reasons why gangsters love the Great North)
Taken from the Vancouver Sun
Court ruling opens way for war against gangsterism
That's good news for police forces, which in recent years have relied heavily on large-scale raids, undercover moles, wiretapping and elite squads
By Peggy Curran
MONTREAL — Should you ever happen to get caught delivering cocaine for the mob, here's a tip. Playing dumb is not a strong defence.
If the people you are dealing with walk like the Mafia and sound like the Hells Angels, the Supreme Court of Canada said Friday you shouldn't be surprised to find you've been cited under stiff provisions that outlaw association with a criminal organization to commit a crime - even if you aren't a card-carrying member of the tribe.
That's good news for police forces, which in recent years have relied heavily on large-scale raids, undercover moles, wiretapping and elite squads to crack the whip on gangsterism.
The ruling appears to open the way for law enforcement agencies to close in on street gangs, cybercrime and other types of criminal activity that depend on structure, leadership and planning.
In a 7-0 ruling, the country's highest court said Section 467.13 of the Criminal Code, the guilt-by-association clause, which has been challenged as vague and unconstitutional, was designed to tackle the very specific problems posed by motorcycle gangs, drug cartels and crime families.
"Organized criminal entities thrive and expand their reach by developing specializations and dividing labour accordingly; fostering trust and loyalty within the organization; sharing customers, financial resources and insider knowledge; and in some circumstances, developing a reputation for violence," wrote Justice Morris Fish. "A group that operates with even a minimal degree of organization over a period of time is bound to capitalize on these advantages and acquire a level of sophistication and expertise that poses an enhanced threat to the surrounding community."
The case dates to 2006, when a Laval man was arrested as part of a major drug sweep by police of a network linked to the Hells Angels and the Mafia. It focussed on on a major drug operation headed by Louis-Alain Dauphin.
Venneri was convicted on eight counts related to his role in supplying Dauphin, the drug kingpin, a man the court identifies simply as D.
His lawyer appealed, and argued Venneri was not a member of the drug-trafficking ring headed by D, but had been called upon as a backup after D's regular supplier got cold feet after the first raids.
In restoring a charge of involvement with organized crime, the Supreme Court rejected Venneri's quibbling about what "in association with" means.
"There is ample evidence that V knew that D was operating a large drug-trafficking organization — or made himself wilfully blind to that obvious fact," Fish wrote, citing evidence showing Venneri had bought cocaine from Dauphin in the past and later became "an important pillar" of his supply network.
The Supreme Court decision in the Venneri case is intended to clear some of the ambiguities arising from the murky question of what constitutes a criminal organization.
Fish argues the justice system needs to stay flexible when dealing with the underworld, rather than having a "checklist that needs to be satisfied in every case."
The court cautioned against law enforcement officials using Section 467.13 too loosely.
"Structure and continuity are still important features that differentiate criminal organizations from other groups of offenders that sometimes act in concert," Fish wrote.
Besides, he added, there are plenty of old-fashioned offences to handle criminal conspiracies that don't qualify as gangland activity.
On the other hand, Fish said the law must not be interpreted so rigidly that it only covers "the stereotypical model of organized crime - that is, to the highly sophisticated, hierarchical and monopolistic model."
"Some criminal entities that do not fit the conventional paradigm of organized crime may nonetheless, on account of their cohesiveness and endurance, pose the type of heightened threat contemplated by the legislative scheme."
Montreal Mafia enforcer Nicola Di Marco
Taken from the Vancouver Sun
Court ruling opens way for war against gangsterism
That's good news for police forces, which in recent years have relied heavily on large-scale raids, undercover moles, wiretapping and elite squads
By Peggy Curran
MONTREAL — Should you ever happen to get caught delivering cocaine for the mob, here's a tip. Playing dumb is not a strong defence.
If the people you are dealing with walk like the Mafia and sound like the Hells Angels, the Supreme Court of Canada said Friday you shouldn't be surprised to find you've been cited under stiff provisions that outlaw association with a criminal organization to commit a crime - even if you aren't a card-carrying member of the tribe.
That's good news for police forces, which in recent years have relied heavily on large-scale raids, undercover moles, wiretapping and elite squads to crack the whip on gangsterism.
The ruling appears to open the way for law enforcement agencies to close in on street gangs, cybercrime and other types of criminal activity that depend on structure, leadership and planning.
In a 7-0 ruling, the country's highest court said Section 467.13 of the Criminal Code, the guilt-by-association clause, which has been challenged as vague and unconstitutional, was designed to tackle the very specific problems posed by motorcycle gangs, drug cartels and crime families.
"Organized criminal entities thrive and expand their reach by developing specializations and dividing labour accordingly; fostering trust and loyalty within the organization; sharing customers, financial resources and insider knowledge; and in some circumstances, developing a reputation for violence," wrote Justice Morris Fish. "A group that operates with even a minimal degree of organization over a period of time is bound to capitalize on these advantages and acquire a level of sophistication and expertise that poses an enhanced threat to the surrounding community."
The case dates to 2006, when a Laval man was arrested as part of a major drug sweep by police of a network linked to the Hells Angels and the Mafia. It focussed on on a major drug operation headed by Louis-Alain Dauphin.
Venneri was convicted on eight counts related to his role in supplying Dauphin, the drug kingpin, a man the court identifies simply as D.
His lawyer appealed, and argued Venneri was not a member of the drug-trafficking ring headed by D, but had been called upon as a backup after D's regular supplier got cold feet after the first raids.
In restoring a charge of involvement with organized crime, the Supreme Court rejected Venneri's quibbling about what "in association with" means.
"There is ample evidence that V knew that D was operating a large drug-trafficking organization — or made himself wilfully blind to that obvious fact," Fish wrote, citing evidence showing Venneri had bought cocaine from Dauphin in the past and later became "an important pillar" of his supply network.
The Supreme Court decision in the Venneri case is intended to clear some of the ambiguities arising from the murky question of what constitutes a criminal organization.
Fish argues the justice system needs to stay flexible when dealing with the underworld, rather than having a "checklist that needs to be satisfied in every case."
The court cautioned against law enforcement officials using Section 467.13 too loosely.
"Structure and continuity are still important features that differentiate criminal organizations from other groups of offenders that sometimes act in concert," Fish wrote.
Besides, he added, there are plenty of old-fashioned offences to handle criminal conspiracies that don't qualify as gangland activity.
On the other hand, Fish said the law must not be interpreted so rigidly that it only covers "the stereotypical model of organized crime - that is, to the highly sophisticated, hierarchical and monopolistic model."
"Some criminal entities that do not fit the conventional paradigm of organized crime may nonetheless, on account of their cohesiveness and endurance, pose the type of heightened threat contemplated by the legislative scheme."
Montreal Mafia enforcer Nicola Di Marco