# data[].attributes.body
This is a article post which talks about 5 of the most terrifying serial killing in Canada. This includes Paul Bernardo & Karla Homolka, Robert Pickton, Elizabeth Wefflaufer, Cody Legebokoff, and Clifford Olson.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As behavioural science and investigation tactics have evolved, the era of the prolific serial killer who manages to evade the law for decades seems to be coming to an end. At least as far as we know. Bruce McArthur -the 60-year-old man recently arrested and charged for the murders of two men in Toronto's gay village and suspected of more-proves that there are still plenty of killers out there lurking in the shadows, and some of them are definitely in Canada.

When you think serial killer, names like Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, and Richard Ramirez probably come to mind. When compared with the U.S., Canada is known for being friendlier, slower paced, and safer-but there have been a few serial killers north of the border that are just as terrifying as their American counterparts. Here are just a few of Canada's worst offenders:

Robert Pickton
Robert Pickton owned a pig farm in Port Coquitlam, B.C. where he would throw huge parties frequented by locals, prostitutes from Vancouver, and members of the Hell's Angels. In 1997, he was charged with the attempted murder of a sex worker but the charges were dismissed. It wasn't until 2002 when police searched the Pickton farm on an illegal firearms warrant that they found personal items that belonged to a number of missing women from the area. Over the next couple months, Pickton was charged with 27 counts of first-degree murder.

Several extensive excavations of the farm and a $70 million investigation revealed the remains of several missing women and evidence that Pickton had both fed the bodies directly to his pigs and ground up human flesh and mixed it with pork that he then sold to the public. He was eventually found guilty of 6 counts of second-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 25 years. An episode of Criminal Minds is based on the Pickton case, Last Podcast on the Left did a detailed series on the case Steve Cameron's book On the Farm provides a closer look at Pickton's notoriety in the Vancouver and Port Coquitlam area.

Paul Bernardo & Karla Homolka
Paul Bernardo is arguably the most well-known Canadian serial killers because of the highly publicized Scarborough rapist investigation followed by the rapes and murders he committed with his wife, Karla Homolka. In 1991, Bernardo conspired with Homolka to drug and rape Homolka's younger sister Tammy because Homolka reportedly wanted to "give Tammy's virginity to Bernardo for Christmas". Tammy ended up choking on her own vomit while unconscious and dying. Her death was ruled accidental.

Bernardo later kidnapped, raped and murdered two teenage girls, Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French, with Homolka's help. Although Bernardo had submitted a DNA sample as a person of interest in the Scarborough rapist case, it took 26 months for it to be tested and matched to him. During that time he was able to murder two innocent girls. Before he was arrested, Homolka turned on him asking for full immunity in return for her testimony. She was instead offered a plea bargain of 12 years-a move that the media dubbed "a deal with the devil"-which she took. Homolka was released from prison in 2005 and Bernardo is eligible to apply for parole in February 2018 although he is designated a dangerous offender and unlikely to ever be released.

Elizabeth Wefflaufer
In September 2016, Elizabeth Wettlaufer, a registered nurser entered an inpatient drug rehab program at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto. While there, she confessed to staff that she had killed and attempted to kill multiple patients while working as a nurse in various long-care homes for the elderly in Woodstock, London, Paris and Ingersoll, Ontario. She later confessed to police that she had purposely injected eight elderly patients with enough insulin to kill them. She plead guilty to all charges and was sentenced to eight concurrent life terms in prison.

Wettlaufer revealed that she had confessed to the murders several times before, once to a lawyer, and she was never reported to the police. An inquiry into the safety and security of residents in long-term care homes has been launched to determine the circumstances that allowed Wettlaufer to kill and attempt to kill so many people without being detected

Cody Legebokoff
One of Canada's youngest convicted serial killers, Cody Legebokoff was 20 when he was arrested for murdering 15-year-old Loren Leslie. He was pulled over by an RCMP officer for driving erratically and found covered in blood. He claimed he had clubbed a deer to death because" "I'm a redneck, that's what we do for fun." Police traced Legebokoff's tire tracks and footprints back to Leslie's remains. His DNA was then linked to the murders of three more women.

Legebokoff was convicted of four counts of first-degree murder in 2014 and sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. The murder of Leslie was covered in the 2015 documentary Highway of Tears, a film about a stretch of Highway 16 in B.C. notorious for being the site of numerous unsolved murders and disappearances of women, many of the them Aboriginal.

Clifford Olson
With a score of 38/40 on the Psychopath Checklist, Clifford Olson is one of Canada's worst serial killers to date. After he was arrested in 1981 on suspicion of the attempted abductions of two girls, Olson was charged with the murder of 14-year-old Judy Kozma. He later confessed to 11 more murders and made a deal with the authorities to lead them to the bodies of the victims if $10,000 was placed in a trust for his wife and infant son for each body.

Olson was a career criminal with more than 90 convictions under his belt before he was charged with murder. He was a sadistic con artist with no sense of remorse. He plead guilty to the murders and was sentenced to 11 concurrent life sentences. He applied for parole three times but was denied due to being classified a dangerous offender. Olson died of cancer in 2011 at the age of 71.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Of Canada's Worst Serial Killers - AmongMen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As behavioural science and investigation tactics have evolved, the era of the prolific serial killer who manages to evade the law for decades seems to be coming to an end. At least as far as we know.

# data[].attributes.body
The Criminal Code of Canada is a law that codifies most criminal offences and procedures in Canada. The Criminal Code contains defences, most of which are part of the common law rather than statue. Important Canadian criminal laws not forming part of the code which includes Controlled Drug and Substance Act, Food and Drugs Act, Income Tax Act, and Youth Criminal Justice Act

# data[].attributes.body
This article is about Toronto having the highest homicide rate within Canada's largest cities. Toronto has surpassed Winnipeg with 3.3 homicides for every 100,000 people. Canada's homicide rate in 2017 was 1.8 per 100,000 people according to Statistics Canada. So far this year Toronto 91 homicides, which has increased from 65 in 2017. Homicides increased in recent years along with a significant increase in shootings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
After the deaths of a former high school football player and an assault victim, Toronto has the distinction of having the highest homicide rate of Canada's largest cities.

At 3.3 homicides for every 100,000 people, Toronto easily surpasses cities including Winnipeg with a rate of 2.6 and Hamilton, Ont. at 1.1, as of Monday.

"I am a little bit surprised to see this to be honest, because historically Toronto has been below the national average," said Jooyoung Lee, a sociology professor at University of Toronto.

Canada's homicide rate in 2017 was 1.8 homicides for every 100,000 people, according to Statistics Canada. There are year-to-year fluctuations to the national homicide rate, but generally it has been declining. Homicides are considered rare in Canada. In 2016 police reported them as accounting for less than 0.2 per cent of violent crimes.

On Sunday, Toronto broke its own record of 89 homicides set in 1991. Lee said one theory for the uptick in Toronto homicides this year is that there are more firearms in circulation and "people in vulnerable situations have more access to firearms."

Cardinal Licorish, 23, was shot in a Scarborough apartment building on Sunday. He was found in a stairwell with gunshot wounds and pronounced dead at the scene. No arrest has been made.

Licorish was a former high school football player, and developed a reputation on the field as someone with a "desire to succeed." He was hardworking, passionate and never missed practices, said a former coach, who didn't want to be named because he feared for his safety.

"He was a good guy to coach," he said.

On Monday, Paul Tonya, 47 who had been assaulted near Moss Park in east downtown died of his injuries, putting Toronto's homicide number at 91. Trevor Clarke has been charged with manslaughter.

Toronto's 91 homicides so far this year is a jump from 65 in 2017, but that's partly because of the van attack in April that killed 10 people. Excluding the van attack, Toronto's homicide rate would still be 2.9 per 100,000 people - still higher than any other major city in Canada.

Homicides increased in recent years alongside a significant jump in shootings, said Lee. So far in 2018, there have been 364 shooting incidents and 497 victims, according to police data. That's more than double 166 shootings and 207 victims in 2014.

"That's a pretty troubling statistic and raises the interesting question of how many firearms are out there?" Lee said, adding there's limited data on the number of unregistered guns in circulation.

Forward-looking, public health-oriented initiatives are needed to address this level of violence, said Lee. Most important will be ensuring the city supports more community programs to help at-risk youth stay away from crime.

Mayor John Tory told reporters Monday Toronto shouldn't accept "any kind of new normal."

"We have to double, triple and quadruple our resolve to do whatever we can," the mayor said, promising to review how youth programs and initiatives are being funded.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Toronto Blows Past Winnipeg For Highest Homicide Rate In Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After the deaths of a former high school football player and an assault victim, Toronto has the distinction of having the highest homicide rate of Canada's largest cities. At 3.3 homicides for every 100,000 people, Toronto easily surpasses cities including Winnipeg with a rate of 2.6 and Hamilton, Ont.

# data[].attributes.body
This website is a very useful website for those learning Criminal law for the first time. It has all the topics regarding criminal law. Topic 3 is a break down of Offences and Defences. Defences include Automation, Consent, Duress/Compulsion, Entrapment, intoxication, Insanity, Mistake of Fact, Necessity, and Self-Defence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Criminal Offences

Robbery

Physical force or threats of violence to steal property from someone. The penalty is up to life imprisonment.

Assault

Physical force directly or indirectly without permission on another person or attempting or threatening by act or gesture to apply force to another person. The penalty is up to five years imprisonment.

Possession of Drugs

Having illegal or prohibited drugs in your possession. The penalty is up to six months imprisonment and/or a $1000 fine if prosecuted by summary conviction; penalty depends on what substance it is and how much is in possession; if prosecuted as an indictable offence it could be up to seven years.

Trespassing by Night

Being on someone else's property at night without permission or lawful excuse. The penalty up to six months imprisonment and/or a $2000 fine.

Breaking and Entering

Definition gaining entry into someone's house or commercial premises and committing or intending to commit another offence. The penalty is up to life imprisonment if the property is a house; up to seven years if the property is a commercial property.

Failing to Stop

Not stopping at a "Stop" sign. The penalty is fines and driver's licence suspension.

Causing a Disturbance

Disturbing the peace and quiet of the occupants of a dwelling house (Note: it could also be making noise at night contrary to a city bylaw.). The penalty is up to six months imprisonment and/or a $2000 fine.

Parking in a "No-Parking" Zone

Leaving your car in a place where parking is not allowed. The penalty is having your car towed away and fines.

Dog off Leash

Walking your dog without a leash. The penalty is having your dog impounded and fines.

Mischief

Causing willful damage to someone else's property. The penalty is up to two years on summary conviction but if over $500.00 in value then up to ten years by indictment.

Theft

Taking something that doesn't belong to you without the owner's permission. The penalty is up to ten years if property stolen over $5000.00 in value; up to two years where property value is less than $5000.00.

Criminal Defences

Automatism

Involuntary conduct may allow an accused to raise the defence of automatism, meaning that a person has no conscious control over his or her body movements. If the defence of automatism is successful, the accused will be lacking the necessary mens rea for a conviction. There are two kinds of automatism, mental disorder and non-mental disorder. Automatism that derives from a state of temporary insanity is classified as mental disorder automatism. If a physical blow to the body or existing medical condition triggers a state of automatism it is classified as a non-mental disorder.

Consent

In very limited situations an accused may claim that the victim consented to the accused's act (for example, if two parties agree to fist fight). Even in a consensual fight, consent is vitiated (i.e. is no longer a defence) if the accused intended to and actually caused serious bodily harm to the victim. Consent is never a defence to murder. Consent to borrow property is a defence to theft because if the Crown wants to successfully prosecute an accused, it would need to show that there was an absence of consent from the property owner.

Duress/Compulsion

This defence is also quite limited because the duress must occur at the moment the crime occurs. To establish duress, the evidence must show that an accused has been compelled to act by threats of immediate bodily harm and that he or she believes at the time of committing the offence that the threats will be carried out. It does not apply to persons that form a conspiracy or are parties to an offence. The defence is limited in that it cannot be used in cases of treason, murder, piracy, attempted murder, sexual assault, forcible abduction, arson or robbery, The person delivering the threat must be present at the time the offence was committed.

Entrapment

This defence applies if an accused has been 'set up' or trapped into committing a crime by the police. Common areas for this defence are in narcotics crimes and prostitution offences. In essence, the defence is one that recognizes the abuse of process by the police. Two basic guidelines that the police must follow to avoid an entrapment defence are that the investigation must target someone already engaged in crime and they must be carrying on a bona fide (genuine) investigation.

Intoxication

As a general rule, intoxication is not a defence to a criminal charge though it can alter the appropriate charge in a given set of circumstances. However, it can be used as a partial defence to what are known as specific intent crimes. If an accused was too intoxicated to form the necessary intent to knowingly carry out a specific crime then intoxication may successfully be uses as a defence. Robbery would be an example of a specific intent crime that might be mitigated by an extreme state of intoxication. The Supreme Court of Canada stated in R. v. Perrault that the degree of drunkenness must render a person "so stupid by drink that he does not know what he is doing" (Barnhorst, 1992, p.69). It is also possible to use the defence of intoxication if it leads to a state of automatism or temporary insanity (R. v. Bernard, SCC 1988).

Insanity

The test of insanity allows for three elements: natural imbecility, a disease of the mind or an inability to appreciate the nature and quality of an act. One of these conditions must exist at the time of an offence to secure the defence of insanity.

Natural imbecility means that the person's mental development is not complete and that the condition has been caused at birth or by natural decay. A disease of the mind is a more complicated element to determine and is left to a judge to decide based upon evidence provided in court. Some recognized disorders are schizophrenia, dementia, paranoia and some types of epilepsy. The accused must suffer from the impairment at the time of the crime, though they need not have a permanent condition.

The burden of proving one's state of insanity rests with the accused and not with the Crown. Although this is a clear violation of the right to be presumed innocent, under the Charter, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that it would be unreasonable for the Crown to disprove insanity in every case.

Mistake of Fact/Mistake of Law

Mistake of fact occurs when an accused believes that his or her actions are not criminal by virtue of the circumstances. The mistake must be a) an honest one and b) such that no offence would have been committed if the circumstances had been as the accused believed them. If Harold takes Emma's lighter, believing it to be his, a mistake of fact has occurred and no crime has been committed. The mistake relates to the mens rea because the accused, if the facts are as they believe them to be, is not acting with a guilty mind. A mistake of law is not mere ignorance of the law as this is not an excuse to commit crimes.

Mistake of law is a limited defence but it can be used with many regulatory offences made to protect public safety or health. If an official provides consent or permission to act, but the act is found in violation of the law, then one may use the defence of mistake of law. In some cases mistake of law and mistake of fact coexist. For example if a tow truck driver is asked to remove a vehicle from private property, by colour of right he is not committing a theft. Colour of right refers to an honest mistake of fact or law that causes a person to believe they have a legal right to possess property.

Necessity

Duress is one type of the general defence of necessity. The broader defence of necessity is rarely used in our system. The defence essentially comes to play when an ordinary person is compelled to break the law in an emergency situation. If one has to illegally enter a building to save a child from fire, the defence would be applicable.

Self-Defence/Provocation

Self defence is another specific type of the defence of necessity. Provocation is not a defence in itself but a condition relevant to the use of self-defence of one's property or personal safety. Self defence occurs under two strict conditions a) the accused must be under reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm and b) the accused must believe there was no other way to save himself or herself.

It is possible to use self-defence even if the victim initiated theassault by verbal threats or a physical act. One may also act in defence of others but one cannot use more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or its repetition. We also have the right to defend personal property either fixed or moveable, but very specific rules apply to each type and to the various circumstances that create the trespass. Provocation can also, if established by the evidence, reduce murder to manslaughter.

More information is available at Canadian Department of Justice or at www.JusticeBC.ca. You can also read the Criminal Code.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Physical force or threats of violence to steal property from someone. The penalty is up to life imprisonment. Physical force directly or indirectly without permission on another person or attempting or threatening by act or gesture to apply force to another person. The penalty is up to five years imprisonment.

# data[].attributes.headline
Difference: Murder, Manslaughter & Homicide

# data[].attributes.subject
Difference: Murder, Manslaughter & Homicide

# data[].attributes.body
This short video explains the difference between each type of murders. First degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both wilful and premeditated – which means that it was committed after planning for the victim. First-degree murder has a sentence to life imprisonment with parole eligibility for 25 years. Manslaughter is unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without premeditation. The offense can be either voluntary or involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter consists of an intentional killing. Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of another without intent. Manslaughter ends up with sentence to life in prison without a minimum or maximum time and ineligibility for parole.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Murder, Manslaughter, Homicide, a killing differences explained in less than 5 minutes

# data[].attributes.body
The term Mens Rea refers to criminal intent. The literal translation would be “guilty mind.” This means the state of mind statutorily required in order to convict a particular crime. Proving this is more challenging, because intent is harder to foresee compared to the results which is actus reus. The term Actus Reus refers to the act that comprises the actions of a crime as required by the statue. To be more exact – it’s either the crime was done or not. However, in some instances it’s you failed to commit the action. An example would be failing to providing fundamental necessities to a child, such as food, water or a safe shelter. Both Mens Rea and Actus Reus makes up a crime.

# data[].attributes.body
This video explains why crimes are tried, and the trial process in Canada. Not everyone who committed a crime can be imprisoned because until proven guilty, the person is presumed innocent.

First, the accused is informed of the charges against them. After that the evidence is presented by the Crown to prove the accused as guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The judge/jury listens to everything presented to them and prior theories of criminology to come to a verdict.

# data[].attributes.body
Criminal law is the body of law that defines the criminal offences, trial of suspected persons, and fixes penalties.

# data[].attributes.body
This video explains the elements of crime. In order to be convicted of a criminal offences, the individual must possess mens rea and actus reus at the same time. Mens rea is the evil intent or the guilty mind. Proving this is more challenging, because intent is harder to foresee compared to the results which is actus reus. Actus reus is the evil act. It’s either the crime was done or not. However, in some instances it’s you failed to commit the action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Elements of Crime (Mens Rea, Actus Reus)