An alleged violent and dangerous offender.The Globe and Mail
Donald Boutilier is on the borderline of what common sense would call a dangerous offender. He does not seem to be a malicious man, let alone a monstrous killer like Paul Bernardo or the late Clifford Olson, or a serial rapist. But he is a repeat offender, and a long-term drug addict with little self-control. When not in jail, he has many times robbed people with an unloaded gun in order to pay for drugs, and then recklessly driven off, often on the wrong side of the road. He has spent much of his life in jail.
On the other hand, Mr. Boutilier has a solid half-brother and a relationship with a girlfriend. And for about a year and a half, in 2007-2008, he did quite well in a residence called Belkin House in Vancouver. But when he moved back to Ontario, he fell into his old ways. On his return to B.C., he was again charged and pleaded guilty three years ago. Since then, he has been in jail. The prosecutors have applied to have him designated as a dangerous offender.
Justice Peter Voith, the judge on the case, is bothered by aspects of the law under which someone can be declared a dangerous offender. For example, it is only after someone is so labelled that there is any consideration of whether he would benefit from psychiatric or other treatment. Surely Mr. Boutilier's susceptibility to treatment should be a factor in deciding whether he should be declared a dangerous offender. If that happens, there are three options -- an indeterminate prison term; the sentence for the offence for which the offender has been convicted; and a sentence for the offence for which he has been convicted, for at least two years, under long-term supervision up to 10 years.
Instead, the Code only allows for deliberation about the prospects of treatment later, when considering the specifics of the offender's sentence – when it's too late to spare him preventive incarceration.
Mr. Boutilier's case may well go to the B.C. Court of Appeal and then on to the Supreme Court. It would be better, though, for the next Parliament to revise the dangerous-offender law, and make it clear who it is for: demonstrably unreformable violent criminals. As former Supreme Court Justice Gérard La Forest put it back in 1987, the rule should apply only to "a very small group of offenders whose personal characteristics militate strenuously in favour of preventative incarceration."
Editor's Note: The original newspaper version and an earlier online version of this editorial incorrectly said the only sentence for a dangerous offender is to be locked up indefinitely. In fact, there are three options. This online version has been corrected.