Source: Halifax Daily News Contact: Mon, 9 Feb 1998 Author: Rachel Boomer CONDITIONAL SENTENCING PROBED Answers sought to tough questions about controversial alternative It's a sentencing option that has stirred much controversy since its inception in September 1996. In Nova Scotia, it has kept convicted wife-beater Vernon Hatcher, drunk driver Ralph Parker, and gambling cop Edward Sisk out of jail. Some complain it's an easy way out, while others say it helps criminals get their lives back on track. It's conditional sentencing - an option that lets criminals serve their time at home instead of behind bars - and it may be due for some fine-tuning, says the Ottawa group in charge of sentencing reform. "We've been looking at ways of improving the enforcement mechanism in particular,'' says David Daubney, sentencing reform team co-ordinator for the federal justice department. He says the group will present its suggestions to Justice Minister Anne McLellan shortly. "There's a fair amount of breach activity, I would say .... I think it means that the conditional sentences are being enforced, which is important for credibility,'' Daubney continues. The national breach rate is 10 to 12 per cent. It's no secret that putting a person in jail is expensive. It costs an average of $55,000 a year to jail a criminal. Supervising them in the community costs only $4,000. But Daubney says cost wasn't the driving factor behind the law, which only applies to offenders serving non-violent crimes that would normally net them less than two years in prison. He says they're more likely to get help for what causes them to commit crimes in the first place - drug and alcohol addiction, sexual abuse, or poorly controlled anger - in the community. As of last August, judges had handed down 13,000 conditional sentences across Canada for crimes ranging from fraud and first-time impaired driving to drug-related offences. Offenders are given a list of conditions to follow, including curfews, mandatory counselling or community service. If authorities suspect they've breached those conditions, it's the offender's responsibility to prove otherwise to a judge. Fail that test, and they could spend the rest of their sentence behind bars. Most legal professionals say they support conditional sentences as a way to get repeat offenders out of the system once and for all. But they say the sentences haven't been without problems. Because breaching a conditional sentence isn't a crime in itself, it's unclear whether police can arrest an offender if it happens, or if courts can issue warrants for them to appear in court. It's questions such as those that Daubney's team is trying to answer. "It's been a real eye-opener, especially for some of the offenders who've been through the system before and think that a conditional sentence is going to be a cakewalk,'' says Dartmouth parole supervisor Janis Aitken. "For some, conditional sentences are a real break and they really value it." "Stan" is one of those people. Two years ago, he got into a heated argument with his mother, pushing her and throwing her TV, VCR and religious textbooks out of an apartment window. She called police and had him charged with assault. An alcoholic, drug abuser and habitual offender who had been in and out of jail since he was 16, Stan was fully prepared to go to jail again - and nearly fell off his chair when the judge gave him an 18-month conditional sentence. He's finishing the last few months of his sentence, and has been sober for most of that time. "I had to get busy. If I'd been in jail, I would've just been laying around, living off the government. I wouldn't have done anything about my addictions, I wouldn't have taken any hard looks at the choices I've made .... Here, I'm making things happen,'' explained the 40-year-old, who didn't want his real name used.