About Tim’s Law

Tim McLean
Tim McLean

Vincent Li has in effect gotten away with murder so it is understandable that people’s emotions escalate when discussing Tim McLean’s tragic death. These same concerns and viewpoints are similarly shared by many people who demand that the justice system render a fair response. Unfortunately, not everyone believes that it was a systematic breakdown that led to Tim’s untimely death. Indeed, there are some groups in Canada who want to deflect the heightened attention away from Tim’s Law. Regardless of one’s stance, most Canadians would agree that the current procedures relied upon when rendering a verdict in Not Criminally Responsible criminal cases is lacking. Why? Because for the most part, the judicial verdicts provide minimal assurances that the criminal behaviour will not be repeated on another family by the same individual at a later date.

Those who are aware of the gruesome details of the murder readily agree that this guy is nuts. And unfortunately, there was likely nothing that could have been done to prevent this barbaric tragedy from occurring.  This is not to suggest that legislative measures cannot be taken to ensure that Li will not be deemed “cured” at some point and subsequently awarded his freedom. In other words, walk the streets among us again. Whether he is likely to re-offend should be a mute point. The reality is that he should never have the opportunity.

And this is the reasoning behind Tim’s Law. The need to have a serious debate on how we “treat” people with mental illness who have offended in this manner. Public consultations across Canada  that would be mandated to compile a list of recommendations including accountability and transparency within institutions. Of course we already know that Tim’s Law can do little to prevent this type of crime. But it could provide strict legal and institutional criterion to prevent these types of criminal activity from reoccurring by the same perpetrator.

This is our hope! We urge you to become actively involved.

 

2 thoughts on “About Tim’s Law”

  1. “Maybe he’s feeling better today. My son’s still dead. What if he chooses not to take his medications?”. I totally agree with the mother that the Mental Health Act needs to change. I have a sister with schizophrenia. She refuses to acknowledge she needs her medication. She is on a CTO (Community Treatment Order) which she has the right to contest every 6 months. My mother and I, as her alternate decision makers, have our lives stopped 2 times every six months – meeting with the doctor then 2nd time to sign documents including a letter we agree my sister to continue on her order after she voluntarily refuses to renew her order. The Mental Health Act has shifted its pendulum to the extreme other side stating that all people with a mental disability have the right to argue against their treatment because they are deemed to be mentally healthy to determine their medical treatment. A couple of times my sister won her appeal. Low and behold – although she would not hurt a fly – she became irrational and verbally abusive to the point she was readmitted and placed on her meds. The Mental Health Act is in need of amendments. The most important is that if there is a history of 1 year where it’s proven the person is incapable of understanding they require medication that no further appeals are permitted and the person remains in the Community Treatment Order indefinitely. It’s a bit contradictory that the law recognizes the need for alternative decision makers but refuses to listen that the order be permanent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *