Nova Scotia considers new rules for bar bouncers, justice minister says
Social Sharing
The Nova Scotia government is considering new regulations for bouncers, according to Justice Minister Becky Druhan.
It comes after some family members of loved ones who died outside bars criticized the province over accountability.
Two of those family members called out the government at Province House last month for introducing a bill that would repeal legislation that hasn't been proclaimed within a decade, including the Security and Investigative Services Act that passed in 2010.
Since the act has never been proclaimed it never took effect. It would have required all security officials working at bars and lounges in the province to have criminal background checks, training and be licensed.
"The Department of Justice and Service Nova Scotia have been working together to consider what our next steps are," said Druhan. "We will be meeting with the families."
The province implemented changes for bouncers at late-night bars, which have cabaret licences, following the death of Ryan Sawyer outside the Halifax Alehouse in 2022. Druhan wouldn't say if the latest changes under consideration are similar to those conditions.
Family confirms meeting scheduled
Ryan Sawyer's mother, Lee, was one of the family members who spoke in front of MLAs in March.
She told MLAs at the time she can't understand why the government hasn't proclaimed the Security and Investigative Services Act or come up with a replacement.
The rules introduced after her son's death don't go far enough and only apply to a handful of bars, Sawyer said at the time.
She confirmed with CBC News she's meeting with government officials at the end of the month, but said via text message she hasn't been told what will be discussed.
B.C., Alberta, Quebec and Ontario have legislation regarding bouncers and security staff.
The family of Stephen Giffin lobbied successive governments after he died after being beaten by bouncers outside a downtown bar in 1999. That effort continued until the Security and Investigative Services Act passed 11 years later.
Giffin's family said it only learned the legislation had not been proclaimed after Ryan Sawyer died under similar circumstances.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
41 minutes ago
- CBC
Killer of London, Ont., Muslim family appeals convictions, challenging use of manifesto at trial
Warning: This story contains distressing details. A London, Ont., man convicted of killing four members of a Muslim family and severely injuring a fifth member in a hate-motivated attack on June 6, 2021, is appealing on three grounds, including that the judge should not have allowed the jury to consider his white nationalist manifesto. A Windsor jury found Nathaniel Veltman guilty in November 2023 of four counts of first-degree murder and one count of attempted murder. Three months later, then Superior Court Justice Renee Pomerance ruled his actions amounted to a "textbook case" of terrorism as defined under Canadian law. He was sentenced on Jan. 24, 2024. Friday's news of the appeal comes on the fourth anniversary of the killing of Yumnah Afzaal, 15, her parents — Madiha Salman, 44, an engineer, and Salman Afzaal, 46, a physiotherapist — and family matriarch Talat Afzaal, 74, a teacher and artist. The youngest family member, a boy, survived. Veltman drove his pickup truck into the family as they were taking an evening stroll on June 6, 2021. Appeal sought on 3 grounds "I appreciate that the community was horrified by this offence and the remaining members of the family were devastated by this offence. I respect that, and I feel very badly for both the family and for the community," Veltman's appeal lawyer, Stephen Whitzman, told CBC News. "Mr. Veltman, of course, has a right to exercise his full legal rights, including his right to an appeal, and it's my job as his lawyer to assist him in doing that, and I hope that everyone will understand that those two things can both exist together." The appeal is being sought on three grounds, based on court records obtained by CBC News: The judge erred in admitting the ideological evidence, including Veltman's white supremacist manifesto, titled "A White Awakening," which set out his political and racist views; The judge erred in admitting Veltman's statements to a police officer which were obtained via a "Charter breach," meaning he was not properly warned of his rights; The judge erred in refusing the defence application for a mistrial because of what Veltman's lawyer at the time called "inflammatory language" during the Crown's closing statement, including references to the crime scene and the grievous injuries suffered by the victims. Veltman's trial lasted 12 weeks. The jury heard evidence he was motivated by right-wing extremist and Islamophobic views, and he described himself as a white nationalist. He grew up in a strict Christian home and fell into a web of online hate during the COVID-19 pandemic, the trial heard. WATCH | CBC's coverage of the judge's 2023 ruling in the Muslim attack case: Afzaal family's murder 'textbook' terrorism, judge rules 1 year ago Duration 2:21 A judge in London, Ont., ruled the actions of the man who ran down a Muslim family with his truck in 2021, killing four people, were a 'textbook example of terrorist motive and intent.' Nathaniel Veltman was already sentenced to life in prison for murdering four members of the Afzaal family. Veltman testified in his own defence and said he took magic mushrooms a day before the killing in order to escape the "hell" of his mind. The killing galvanized London and Canadian society to create laws and groups that would combat Islamophobia.
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Babysitter must be acquitted in toddler's drowning death, Supreme Court of Canada says
OTTAWA — An acquittal is the appropriate outcome for a British Columbia woman whose conviction in the drowning death of a toddler was set aside two years ago, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled. Article content Tammy Bouvette was charged with second-degree murder but pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of criminal negligence causing the bathtub drowning death of a 19-month-old girl she had been babysitting in 2011 in Cranbrook, B.C. Article content Article content Article content In April 2023, the B.C. Court of Appeal found the Crown had failed to disclose key evidence to Bouvette's lawyers, depriving her of the opportunity to make an informed decision about how to plead. Article content Article content The Court of Appeal called the original conviction 'the product of a miscarriage of justice' because the evidence and circumstances established a reasonable possibility that Bouvette would not have pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing death if full disclosure had been made. Article content The Appeal Court ordered a judicial stay of proceedings, permanently halting the case without determining guilt or innocence. Bouvette then asked the Supreme Court for an acquittal — a declaration of being found not guilty. The Crown agreed that she should be acquitted. Article content In its decision Friday, the Supreme Court unanimously said an acquittal is the appropriate remedy in the case and provided two sets of reasons for reaching the conclusion. Article content Under section 686(2) of the Criminal Code, a conviction is quashed when an appeal has been allowed due to a miscarriage of justice. Article content Article content The appeal court then looks at the appropriate remedy: an acquittal, a new trial or a judicial stay. Article content Writing for the Supreme Court majority, Justice Nicholas Kasirer said Bouvette should be acquitted immediately on the grounds that the Crown seeks an acquittal and has expressly stated that it would call no evidence at a new trial. Article content Rather than forcing the parties to go through pro forma proceedings to achieve this result, or standing in the way of it by entering a judicial stay, the just outcome is for the acquittal to be entered now — even though there is evidence that could lead a reasonable jury, properly instructed, to convict Bouvette at a new trial, Kasirer said. Article content 'Consequently, Ms. Bouvette must be acquitted by the Court without further delay or any possible distress associated with sending the matter back to the trial court,' he wrote. Article content
CBC
3 hours ago
- CBC
B.C. babysitter must be acquitted in toddler's drowning death, Supreme Court rules
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that a woman originally convicted in the 2011 drowning death of a toddler in her care must be acquitted. Tammy Marion Bouvette was babysitting 19-month-old Iyanna Teeple in Cranbrook, B.C., in 2011 when the toddler was found unresponsive in the bath. Teeple was flown to a hospital in Calgary, where she later died. Bouvette was originally charged with second-degree murder in the child's death, then later pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of criminal negligence. She was sentenced to 12 months in jail. But an independent review of the case determined that the Crown hadn't disclosed all evidence to Bouvette or her counsel before she entered her guilty plea. In 2023, the B.C. Court of Appeal quashed her conviction and ordered a stay of proceedings, but declined to enter an acquittal. Bouvette appealed and, in a ruling released Friday morning, the Supreme Court of Canada concluded she should be immediately acquitted on the grounds that the Crown also sought an acquittal and said it would call no evidence at a new trial. 'A miscarriage of justice' The case became the subject of an investigation by CBC's The Fifth Estate in 2020 after CBC journalists uncovered a report that criticized pivotal pathology evidence in the Crown's case against Bouvette. Bouvette has maintained she did not abuse or kill the child and told The Fifth Estate she had wanted to avoid a lengthier prison sentence for a murder charge when she made her plea. In 2023, the B.C. Court of Appeal determined that the B.C. Prosecution Service had failed to disclose to Bouvette's defence lawyers several items of key evidence, including the pathology evidence report, which supported Bouvette's claim that she had not hurt or neglected the child. Bouvette's former defence lawyer told The Fifth Estate that he had not received that report from the Crown during the prosecution. At the time, the judges wrote that they "make no finding of bad faith or malice on the part of the Crown. But neither can we ignore that the disclosure breaches were not isolated or confined to information of dubious value to the appellant." "As a consequence of material non-disclosure, the appellant was deprived of the opportunity to make an informed decision about how to plead apprised of the strengths and weaknesses of the case against her on fundamental issues." The court ruled that Bouvette's criminal negligence conviction causing the toddler's death was "the product of a miscarriage of justice," and ordered a stay of proceedings because retrying her case would be an "abuse of process." Friday ruling In the Friday ruling, judges were unanimous in their decision, if for different reasons. Writing for the majority, Justice Nicholas Kasirer said the first possible ground for an acquittal under section 686(2) of the Criminal Code is where there's a lack of evidence to ground a reasonable conviction. The second possible ground is where the Crown seeks an acquittal and says it would call no evidence at a new trial.
