Sex Offender Who Served Time In Thailand Arrested In Canada

[webfact]

Sex offender arrested in Canada for public safety: police

CTVNews.ca Staff

VANCOUVER: -- The decision to arrest a convicted pedophile moments after he landed at Vancouver’s airport was made in the interest of public safety, said the RCMP.

Christopher Neil was returning from Thailand, where he spent more than three years behind bars after being found guilty of sexually abusing a 13-year-old boy, when he was greeted by police at the airport.

The severity of Neil’s offenses overseas were significant enough to raise concerns in Canada, Cpl. Mathias Van Laer of the RCMP’s Integrated Child Exploitation Unit told CTV News Channel on Sunday.

“When you have crimes of that nature, crimes against children, this is a segment of the population that’s a lot more vulnerable than others,” said Van Laer. “They can’t defend themselves so we need to have some measured controls.”

On Monday, the Maple Ridge, B.C. native will appear before a judge to assess his release or impose any conditions.

“We felt a responsibility to tell people we were keeping an eye on him as he was returning to Canada,” said Van Laer.

He added that police will not charge Neil with crimes committed abroad.

Full story: http://www.ctvnews.c...police-1.977681

-- ctvnews 2012-10-01

related topic:

Canadian Christopher Paul Neil "Mr. Swirl" Get Reduced Jail Term In Bangkok

http://www.thaivisa....erm-in-bangkok/

[Jane Doe]

If you are not able to drive a car, you won't get a license (unless you buy one).

In most countries you can't buy a gun, because it is dangerous.

In many Western companies you can't even operate any machine or tool without safety training.

Convicted pedophiles who clearly can not handle their 'tool' should have it removed.

[yougivemebaby]

I thought he could be charged in Canada also... Is that only the US?

[Ulysses G.]

If someone served time for something already, I doubt if they would charge them again for the same crime, although that might change in the future.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Mario2008]

I thought he could be charged in Canada also... Is that only the US?

For this kind of crimes abroad he can be charged in Canada also. But in this case he already stood trail and you cannot be convicted twice for the same crime.

[WilliaminBKK]

The original crime is a moot point - I believe the issue is Canada has intel he will re-offend.

I think Canada did the right thing, he committed the crime abroad, was arrested abroad, served his time abroad (too short IMO) deported from Thailand and arrived in Canada, was arrested on arrival to protect children. Now take his passport away and classify him as a threat to children - big brother whatever you want to call it I'm happy Canada did it's part. Some crimes go above jurisdiction.

Edited October 1, 2012 by WilliaminBKK

[Scott]

The most expedient way of dealing with situations like this is to have the offender serve the last portion of the sentence in the home country. That allows the home country to impose restrictions on the convicts behavior at the time of release.

[steveG]

Fully agree with Scott. Also saves Thailand the cost of imprisoning a national of another country - albeit very small cost in Thailand!

Cant they fit one of those special tracking devices to people who are a perceived danger to society - an electronic tag like those administered to pet dogs!!

[mikecwm]

The police are creating publicity in the hope that someone in Canada who might have been assaulted by him will come forward - then they can charge him with a crime in Canada.

The last thing they want is for him to disappear into the population and start his pedophile behaviour again.

[GentlemanJim]

The inevitable truth that comes out of all this is that none of us have the right to a passport. It is a Government issued document and without it we are all able to be restricted in terms of travel to our country of origin. Is that a principle that fly's in the face of our human rights?...probably, the lawyers can argue that one, but in this case I am delighted that Canada has taken 'control' of it's 'Mr Swirly' and is taking steps to curtail his freedom to travel. It's not as if Canada is exactly a small place anyway, if it were Singapore or Luxembourg then Mr Swirly would be stuffed

[robblok]

I know this wont be a popular post but if the guy did his time why punish him again. I do agree keep an eye on him make sure he does not go wrong again. But locking him up just because he might do something sounds like quantanamobay justice.

If like the other poster its to get someone to recognize him and file a complaint im all for it. Just against locking someone up who served time already.

[Mario2008]

He was not arrested for the same offense, he was arrested for fear he would do the same and a judge can now put restraints on as prevetive measures if the judge sees that would be fit.

It is a kind of protective custody order, not a criminal charge.

[robblok]

He was not arrested for the same offense, he was arrested for fear he would do the same and a judge can now put restraints on as prevetive measures if the judge sees that would be fit.

It is a kind of protective custody order, not a criminal charge.

Isnt that the same as putting someone in jail for something he has not done yet.

I am all four tough justice, but this sounds a bit wrong to me.

But if its something like you cant live near a school or be seen near a school ect.. then im all for it. Just not for putting him in jail for something he has not done yet.

Edited October 1, 2012 by robblok

[RachaRob]

Dont care what he has done, he did his time. They knew he was comming back so why did they arrest him again? Next u will arrested in your country for speeding here in Thailand?

[Mario2008]

He was not arrested for the same offense, he was arrested for fear he would do the same and a judge can now put restraints on as prevetive measures if the judge sees that would be fit.

It is a kind of protective custody order, not a criminal charge.

Isnt that the same as putting someone in jail for something he has not done yet.

I am all four tough justice, but this sounds a bit wrong to me.

But if its something like you cant live near a school or be seen near a school ect.. then im all for it. Just not for putting him in jail for something he has not done yet.

It is a preventive measures and requires him to be brough before a judge, who then can impose preventive measures like indeed not comming near a school, not working with children etc. Although a judge in such case could order someone commited for treatment, think about someone who is mentally ill and is a danger to himself or others because he is psychotic, he is not being prosecuted and does not face jail time or prison sentence.

[robblok]

He was not arrested for the same offense, he was arrested for fear he would do the same and a judge can now put restraints on as prevetive measures if the judge sees that would be fit.

It is a kind of protective custody order, not a criminal charge.

Isnt that the same as putting someone in jail for something he has not done yet.

I am all four tough justice, but this sounds a bit wrong to me.

But if its something like you cant live near a school or be seen near a school ect.. then im all for it. Just not for putting him in jail for something he has not done yet.

It is a preventive measures and requires him to be brough before a judge, who then can impose preventive measures like indeed not comming near a school, not working with children etc. Although a judge in such case could order someone commited for treatment, think about someone who is mentally ill and is a danger to himself or others because he is psychotic, he is not being prosecuted and does not face jail time or prison sentence.

I am all for that, no problems there must have misunderstood it.

[jshorts]

The original crime is a moot point - I believe the issue is Canada has intel he will re-offend.

I think Canada did the right thing, he committed the crime abroad, was arrested abroad, served his time abroad (too short IMO) deported from Thailand and arrived in Canada, was arrested on arrival to protect children. Now take his passport away and classify him as a threat to children - big brother whatever you want to call it I'm happy Canada did it's part. Some crimes go above jurisdiction.

Where did you read about the intel Canada has? Please provide the link.

[Wavefloater]

Dont care what he has done, he did his time. They knew he was comming back so why did they arrest him again? Next u will arrested in your country for speeding here in Thailand?

I'm concerned about what he has done, and I completely agree with making him go through some process of accountability and restriction. If this were a non-Canadian trying to get a visa or residency approval, he would (hopefully) be refused due to the fact that he has proven to be someone who has perverse tendencies aimed at children -- very vulnerable people, and he cannot control these perverse urges. For the authorities to know this (due to legal process in another country) and do nothing to prevent it from happening when he returns to his home country would be appallingly wrong. He is a Canadian resident, and although no country likely wants him on their soil, he does have the right to return to Canada. The authorities there have an obligation to rest of the population, who (for the most part) manage to live lawful existences, to do what they can to protect them from this creep.

I also like the suggestion that making his presence and crime known via the media may prompt any of his victims in Canada to come forward. It should be known if he was also in his sick habit while living in Canada.

All this is said assuming that the charges in Thailand were legitimate, and he wasn't the victim of a frame-up or some injustice.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Wavefloater

[jshorts]

The most expedient way of dealing with situations like this is to have the offender serve the last portion of the sentence in the home country. That allows the home country to impose restrictions on the convicts behavior at the time of release.

Where did you read that the offender did not serve his complete sentence? Please provide link.

[jshorts]

He was not arrested for the same offense, he was arrested for fear he would do the same and a judge can now put restraints on as prevetive measures if the judge sees that would be fit.

It is a kind of protective custody order, not a criminal charge.

Are you suggesting that countries should do that for everyone who breaks any law?

[Scott]

I didn't say that he didn't serve his complete time in Thailand. What I said was that the most expedient way of dealing with situations like this is to have the offender serve the last portion of the sentence in the home country. That way, the home country can set conditions on someone being released from prison.

As it now stands, it might be legally questionable to set conditions on a crime when the sentence is completed and occurred in another country.

[Dork]

This report sounds like legal quackery to me. A properly functioning legal system should be devoid of emotion and from a purely legal standpoint, I'm surprised that this could happen in a country like Canada.

[Colabamumbai]

Being a Canadian I guess it is good news,, broadcast his name any way. As for the Canadian justice system???? This is why I live in Thailand.....

[TommoPhysicist]

I know everyone hates sex offenders (drug dealers and murderers no problem), but this seems somehow wrong. After a sentence (questionable?) and prison stay in a corrupt country, re-arrest in a country with a supposedly good justice system.

Just glad I'm not Canadian.

Whatever happened to the concept 'he served his sentence and paid his dues to society?'

Edited October 1, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[Pacificperson]

I think that in the US you can be charged for the act of crossing a border with the intent of having sex with someone under 16. The act of traveling with intent is the offense.

[laislica]

I think that in the US you can be charged for the act of crossing a border with the intent of having sex with someone under 16. The act of traveling with intent is the offense.

WOW!!!

That's a bit over the top!

How does anyone know what you are thinking?

If you have house breaking tools - fair enough - going equipped for house breaking.

However, most every male in the world is "equipped"!

Big brother gone mad!!

[Scott]

I think that in the US you can be charged for the act of crossing a border with the intent of having sex with someone under 16. The act of traveling with intent is the offense.

WOW!!!

That's a bit over the top!

How does anyone know what you are thinking?

If you have house breaking tools - fair enough - going equipped for house breaking.

However, most every male in the world is "equipped"!

Big brother gone mad!!

I am not sure of the wording of the law, but it is geared for sex tourists whose specific aim is to engage in sex with underage children. In the case of this guy, I don't know that the law would apply since he was working overseas.

[laislica]

I think that in the US you can be charged for the act of crossing a border with the intent of having sex with someone under 16. The act of traveling with intent is the offense.

WOW!!!

That's a bit over the top!

How does anyone know what you are thinking?

If you have house breaking tools - fair enough - going equipped for house breaking.

However, most every male in the world is "equipped"!

Big brother gone mad!!

I am not sure of the wording of the law, but it is geared for sex tourists whose specific aim is to engage in sex with underage children. In the case of this guy, I don't know that the law would apply since he was working overseas.

It's just the very disturbing idea that some "official" can decide that They" know what someone else is intending to do and then take action based on their ·understanding".

I can see that if someone has been convicted in their own country of this crime, they could (should) have their passport withdrawn but that should be done at the original sentencing, NOT at some later date by someone who "thinks" they have an intention to offend.

I think that these folk are truly sick, and need psychiatric help rather than being just locked up.

I would like to see them interred in a mental institution until the "authorities" believe them to be no longer a danger to the public.

If this takes a lifetime, so be it.

Perhaps such a confinement may persuade the casual pedophile to control their urges.....

Third world countries are a magnet for pedophiles because poor people are so desperate for money that they will tolerate such behaviour better than in Western countries.

I hate it and also the straight sex tourism, they are an abuse of poor people.

I read Stephen Leathers eBook The Private Dancer and was horrified because it was so graphic and had a real sense of being true.

I am happy to say that I have never even been into a girly or Gogo bar and I intend to keep it that way!

[simple1]

I think that in the US you can be charged for the act of crossing a border with the intent of having sex with someone under 16. The act of traveling with intent is the offense.

WOW!!!

That's a bit over the top!

How does anyone know what you are thinking?

If you have house breaking tools - fair enough - going equipped for house breaking.

However, most every male in the world is "equipped"!

Big brother gone mad!!

Ever heard of the FBI monitoring chat sites, pretending to be underage for stings etc- happens in many western countries with specialised police units

Edited October 1, 2012 by simple1

[laislica]

I think that in the US you can be charged for the act of crossing a border with the intent of having sex with someone under 16. The act of traveling with intent is the offense.

WOW!!!

That's a bit over the top!

How does anyone know what you are thinking?

If you have house breaking tools - fair enough - going equipped for house breaking.

However, most every male in the world is "equipped"!

Big brother gone mad!!

Ever heard of the FBI monitoring chat sites, pretending to be underage for stings etc- happens in many western countries with specialised police units

Nope, not being a US citisen I haven't come across that