Sylvain Edmond Theriault

NB-I mentioned the nomenclature of "life altering" in this post because "life altering" has been used many times by the police in their comms over the past week. Obviously life altering and life threatening are not mutually exclusive terms, but if an attack was life threatening, then the suspects should be charged with attempted murder. What I have observed is no charges for attempted murder in cases including the Bridle Path home invasion in which 3 of the victims were shot and two of the victims (one who had also been shot) had hammer attacks to the head. Their injuries were also described as, "Life altering." It's notable to me because I don't see how these injuries wouldn't also be life threatening. Especially in the context of Canadian medical care. From a legal perspective, I learned this week that Crown prosecutors choose to pursue charges for aggravated assault more often than attempted murder because it is far easier to secure a conviction for aggravated assault. But attempted murder has a significantly higher sentence than aggravated assault. I believe that anyone who stomps on another person's head is attempting to murder them. I don't believe that this should be difficult to prove in a court of law, when there is videotape evidence, the victim has catastrophic injuries, and there were eye witnesses to the attack. But Canadians stand for nothing and demand nothing, so here we are. We have pretty, sympathetic words, which amount to being worthless, and a legal system which facilitates psychopathy. At victim and taxpayer expense.