SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Frank Caputo

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 3, 2023
Context: Committee Evidence - JUST-75 (JUST) - Oct/3/23
Mr. Frank Caputo (Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, CPC)
  • 05:33:49 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome to your new role, Minister, and congratulations on your new role. Minister, you said at the outset that sex offences against children are despicable and you condemn them in the strongest terms. I think we all would at this point. You've also spoken about Bill S-12 and its role in the protection of children. I take it that you would support the elimination of house arrest as a sentencing option for those who are convicted of sexual offences against children.
87 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: Committee Evidence - JUST-75 (JUST) - Oct/3/23
Mr. Frank Caputo
  • 05:35:11 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Minister, I want to go back to that. You talked about the denunciation and the denunciatory element, and you're talking about public safety. There's an element of justice here as well. You're talking about public safety. We can talk about CSOs a lot here in the next few minutes, but strictly from a justice perspective, the person who is the victim of the sexual offence, the child, is suffering and literally imprisoned psychologically for life. Are you saying that the punishment for the person who offended against the child—the child who is imprisoned for life psychologically—should be that they serve house arrest for under two years? Is that your position?
117 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: Committee Evidence - JUST-75 (JUST) - Oct/3/23
Mr. Frank Caputo
  • 05:36:14 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
If I have your position correct, your position is that a person cannot get a conditional sentence for a sexual offence against a child. Do I have that right?
29 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: Committee Evidence - JUST-75 (JUST) - Oct/3/23
Mr. Frank Caputo
  • 05:36:39 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Okay—and those haven't been struck down. Let's say section 151 of the Criminal Code. I'm thinking back to a case that I asked you about, where a mother offended against a seven- or eight-year-old child. The judge reasoned that it was the first time it had happened and imposed a conditional sentence order after trial, so there was no mitigating value. It was overturned on appeal. I believe the charge was under section 151, but I don't recall that the appeal was on the basis that the sentence was illegal. It was that it was not proportionate. To my understanding, and maybe the official can correct me—I would defer to Mr. Brock—a number of those mandatory minimums have been struck down. Is it your position that a person cannot get a conditional sentence order under, say, section 151 of the code, or section 271, sexual assault, if that is a sexual offence against a child? Is that your position?
171 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: Committee Evidence - JUST-75 (JUST) - Oct/3/23
Mr. Frank Caputo
  • 05:38:19 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I'm sorry. I have only 30 seconds, Minister. If there is any wiggle room on this, where somebody for a sexual offence against a child, including Internet luring under section 172.1, sexual interference or a sexual offence, for there to be a conditional sentence order, would you be prepared to plug that—yes or no?
58 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: Committee Evidence - JUST-75 (JUST) - Oct/3/23
Mr. Frank Caputo
  • 05:38:43 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
I'm not. I'm just asking generally. Hon. Arif Virani: Fair enough, Mr. Caputo. Mr. Frank Caputo: We have five seconds. Is it yes or no?
27 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: Committee Evidence - JUST-75 (JUST) - Oct/3/23
Mr. Frank Caputo
  • 05:39:33 p.m.
  • Watch
  • Read Aloud
Sir, was that offence—
5 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border