'Unbound by laws': B.C. court gives man 6 years for illegal sea cucumber fishing
Scott Steer and his co-accused corporation faced eight charges, including fishing in a closed area without a licence, selling more than $1 million worth of illegally harvested sea cucumbers and breaching an earlier order where he was forbidden from possessing fishing vessels.
B.C. Supreme Court Justice David Crerar in Nanaimo says in his ruling that Steer has a "remarkably long record" of fisheries violations and other offences dating back more than a decade, and short stints in jail have "wholly failed to deter or rehabilitate" him.
The rulings says Steer's offences over the years include illegally harvesting crabs from Vancouver harbour, defrauding a vessel owner, breaching conditions in an intimate partner violence case and various probation violations.
Province makes move to seize house, accounts of B.C. man with multiple illegal fishing charges
Crerar's ruling says Steer and his wife, Melissa Steer, continued their illegal fishing operations while his trial was ongoing, and his persistent "knowing and mocking flouting of the law" indicates the "unlikelihood of remorse or rehabilitation, now or in future."
The ruling says Steer believes himself "unbound by laws" and that short stints in jail as punishments are "literally a joke," and in addition to the prison term, he and his company have been fined $1.1 million "specifically to condemn the Steers' deliberate, destructive, and dishonest actions."
'Threat' to fisheries
Since 2008, there have been 15 different Fisheries and Oceans Canada files on Steer. He has been convicted multiple times for fishing illegally and has faced significant fines and jail time.
He has been described in a previous judgment as "a threat to the health of the fishery" and "[displaying] a shocking lack of conscience and human decency."
In November 2021, a B.C. Supreme Court judge banned Steer from fishing for life, the first lifetime ban for a Pacific region fisherman in more than a decade.
The ban came after Steer was caught illegally crab fishing in the Vancouver harbour and took off in his boat, leading to a high-speed pursuit, according to court documents.
His boat, a truck and a trailer were all seized. Officials found around 250 live crabs on board, which were later released back into the water.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Ottawa Citizen
2 hours ago
- Ottawa Citizen
Ontario court upholds sex assault sentence for man who removed condom
Article content M.F. reported the encounter to police, saying, according to the court documents, that it was the worst day/ of her life. Article content 'She considered self-harm and suicide. She called the suicide prevention line and said that the person who answered her call was her 'saving grace' and got her through the night,' Gillese wrote. Article content Following a two-day trial, the respondent was convicted. Article content The trial judge found that M.F. had not heard Ranatunga say he was removing the condom and that there was no ambient noise in the bedroom that would have impaired her hearing. The trial judge also rejected Ranatunga's argument that he had an 'honest but mistaken' belief that M.F. had consented to unprotected sex. Article content At the sentencing hearing, the Crown sought a three-year penitentiary sentence, and the defence submitted that a conditional sentence of 18 months to two years less a day was appropriate or a sentence of imprisonment between 12 and 18 months to be served in a reformatory. Article content Article content In the end, the trail judge sentenced the respondent to a conditional sentence of two years less a day, finding that he was a first-time offender with good rehabilitative prospects. Article content The trial judge found that removing a condom without consent is a 'form of violence' and an 'extremely serious violation,' but found that removing a condom is 'qualitatively different in nature than a sexual assault which involves physically holding a person down against their will and penetrating them or penetrating them when they are in a state where they could not resist; for example, sleeping or intoxicated'. Article content The Crown appealed the case, arguing that the sentence was unfit and that the judge did not appropriately consider the violent nature of the offence. Article content Gillese objected strongly to the trial judge's reasoning. 'There is no principled basis to distinguish penetration following non-consensual condom removal from other forms of penetrative sexual assault nor is there any principled basis for creating a much lower sentencing range for non-consensual condom removal sexual assault than that for other forms of penetrative sexual assault,' she wrote. Article content Article content She argued that forced penetrative sexual assault typically calls for three to five years behind bars. Article content However, the other two justices disagreed, saying the trial judge had intended to contrast sexual assault cases with overt force or incapacitation and that the trial judge was owed deference in her decision within the changing legal landscape of these sorts of sexual assault cases. Article content The decision builds on the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in R. v. Kirkpatrick, which clarified how condom use factors into sexual consent under Canadian law. In that case, the court found that a person can place conditions on their consent, and if those conditions aren't met, the sexual activity becomes non-consensual.
Edmonton Journal
2 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
Ontario court upholds sex assault sentence for man who removed condom
Article content M.F. reported the encounter to police, saying, according to the court documents, that it was the worst day/ of her life. Article content 'She considered self-harm and suicide. She called the suicide prevention line and said that the person who answered her call was her 'saving grace' and got her through the night,' Gillese wrote. Article content Following a two-day trial, the respondent was convicted. Article content The trial judge found that M.F. had not heard Ranatunga say he was removing the condom and that there was no ambient noise in the bedroom that would have impaired her hearing. The trial judge also rejected Ranatunga's argument that he had an 'honest but mistaken' belief that M.F. had consented to unprotected sex. Article content At the sentencing hearing, the Crown sought a three-year penitentiary sentence, and the defence submitted that a conditional sentence of 18 months to two years less a day was appropriate or a sentence of imprisonment between 12 and 18 months to be served in a reformatory. Article content Article content In the end, the trail judge sentenced the respondent to a conditional sentence of two years less a day, finding that he was a first-time offender with good rehabilitative prospects. Article content The trial judge found that removing a condom without consent is a 'form of violence' and an 'extremely serious violation,' but found that removing a condom is 'qualitatively different in nature than a sexual assault which involves physically holding a person down against their will and penetrating them or penetrating them when they are in a state where they could not resist; for example, sleeping or intoxicated'. Article content The Crown appealed the case, arguing that the sentence was unfit and that the judge did not appropriately consider the violent nature of the offence. Article content Gillese objected strongly to the trial judge's reasoning. 'There is no principled basis to distinguish penetration following non-consensual condom removal from other forms of penetrative sexual assault nor is there any principled basis for creating a much lower sentencing range for non-consensual condom removal sexual assault than that for other forms of penetrative sexual assault,' she wrote. Article content Article content She argued that forced penetrative sexual assault typically calls for three to five years behind bars. Article content However, the other two justices disagreed, saying the trial judge had intended to contrast sexual assault cases with overt force or incapacitation and that the trial judge was owed deference in her decision within the changing legal landscape of these sorts of sexual assault cases. Article content The decision builds on the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling in R. v. Kirkpatrick, which clarified how condom use factors into sexual consent under Canadian law. In that case, the court found that a person can place conditions on their consent, and if those conditions aren't met, the sexual activity becomes non-consensual.
National Observer
3 hours ago
- National Observer
Canada risks legal blowback over deep-sea mining firm's actions
The Canadian deep-sea mining company making waves by trying to sidestep international constraints to extract critical minerals from the ocean floor is now facing increased global scrutiny and legal threats. What's more, by failing to rein in the rogue company, Canada is also vulnerable to legal action for failing to uphold its international treaty obligations, experts suggest. Debate about Vancouver-based The Metals Company (TMC) and its subsidiary partners took centre stage at this month's meeting of the International Seabed Authority (ISA) — the entity responsible for regulating mining in the high seas under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea treaty (UNCLOS). The company is drawing fire for attempting to circumvent the ISA process and treaty dictates by pursuing international mining permits via the United States — which isn't an ISA member or a signatory of the treaty. In response, the ISA's technical committee has pledged to ramp up scrutiny on all proposed mining contractors, particularly TMC's subsidiaries Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. and Tonga Offshore Mining Limited, to ensure they are adhering to international law. If not, TMC and their sponsor states aren't likely to get their exploration permits renewed next year, Salomé Sané, nature and biodiversity campaigner with Greenpeace Canada. What's more, other companies and countries tied to TMC if they proceed to mine unilaterally may also find themselves embroiled in international legal disputes. Vancouver-based The Metals Company is attempting to circumvent international regulations via a backdoor US mining bid, but its actions may expose Canada to proceedings for failing to uphold its international treaty obligations. 'Canadian-based The Metals Company is finally facing the legal consequences of its rogue actions,' Sané said, adding deep-sea mining amounts to 'ecological theft' and puts one of the planet's last untouched ecosystems at risk. 'We don't need deep-sea minerals for the clean energy transition, and we certainly don't need another tech-bro CEO like Gerard Barron to continue a legacy of exploitation, disregard for frontline communities and international law.' Canada also has an international legal responsibility to prevent its national firms from violating maritime mining conventions and inaction could result in diplomatic and legal repercussions, said lawyer Coalter Lathrop, a principal at Sovereign Geographic and a fellow at the Payne Institute for Public Policy at the Colorado School of Mines. As an ISA member and signatory to UNCLOS, if Canada, actively or passively, allows TMC to mine, it could invite legal action under article 139 of the treaty, which affirms countries are responsible to ensure national entities comply with international rules, Lathrop said. 'Canada would open itself to international proceedings by any of the other 168 parties to the convention,' he said. Members of parliament in the Netherlands and Switzerland, countries with ties to Allseas, an international offshore contractor involved with TMC, are already questioning what their government's steps will be, Lathrop noted. It's likely Canada, Korea, Japan and other nations with ties to TMC will do the same, he added. Canada 'negotiating, and continues to negotiate' Canada will uphold UNCLOS and is engaging at the ISA to put into place a rigorous regulatory structure for deep-sea mining by taking an ecosystem-based approach grounded in science, transparency and robust compliance and inspection mechanisms, said a ministry of global affairs spokesperson in an email to Canada's National Observer. The ministry did not clarify what steps or measures the federal government is contemplating or planning to take if TMC as a Canadian company operates outside of ISA authority. 'We are following this development closely but note that no mining activity is currently underway,' said John Babcock, spokesperson for Global Affairs Canada. 'Canada has been negotiating, and continues to negotiate in good faith at the ISA and urges the expeditious finalization of exploitation regulations to ensure the deep seabed mining industry is responsibly managed.' Despite Barron's comments that he believes a US permit is imminent, Lathrop said TMC isn't likely to obtain a permit before the end of the Trump administration. And the company's dual-track approach via the US and ISA creates significant legal tensions, he added. If the ISA rejects or revokes TMC's exploration contract due to non-compliance, Nauru could seek another contractor — and competing claims could emerge over the same patch of international seabed, he said. Canada isn't showing enough public leadership when it comes to denouncing TMC or reaffirming its commitment to the global moratorium on deep-sea mining, Sané said. 'Since the new Carney government came in there hasn't been any public support to reaffirm that commitment for a moratorium, and particularly, there hasn't been any comment about the fact that a Canadian company is bypassing the global process in place to collaborate with Trump and mine the deep sea,' she said. 'This silence has become dangerous, and we need the government to denounce this kind of rogue behaviour that goes against multilateralism.'
