Sign the Petition



WHEREAS: Vincent Li brutally murdered Tim McLean in July 2008;

WHEREAS: Vincent Li was found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of a Mental Disorder for the murder of Tim McLean;

WHEREAS: offenders who are found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of a Mental Disorder may be detained in treatment facilities and not prisons;

WHEREAS: offenders found guilty of first degree murder are sentenced to life in prison without parole for twenty-five years and those found guilty of second degree murder are sentenced to life without parole for a minimum of ten years;

WHEREAS: there is no minimum period of detention for offenders found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of a Mental Disorder and their cases may be reviewed every year by a Review Board Committee.

We, the undersigned, citizens of Canada call upon the House of Commons

To amend the Criminal Code of Canada to ensure those who commit murder but are found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of a Mental Disorder are detained for a minimum period of time.

Include your name, province, and the postal code where you reside as a comment below.

Please feel free to leave additional thoughts offering your support. Your email will be registered by the system and will only be visible for administration purposes. No email addresses will be used for any purpose other than confirming your support. Thank you for supporting Tim’s Law.

Note: The admin is aware that the petition count is not showing quite accurately. The support has been overwhelming and appear to have revealed a minor issue that is affecting the count total. Thank you to those individuals that brought this to our attention. 


Who is Dr Stanley Yaren?

Who is Dr Stanley Yaren? I need to state first and foremost that the views expressed in this post may not be shared by others. I am of the opinion that the crown prosecutor never fulfilled their legal duty to the people they represent. I am also of the opinion that the taxpayers were double billed for this trial. The taxpayers should not be burdened with a requirement to pay for the defence lawyers nor was there any need for a witnesses for the defence. This was a waste of taxpayer’s money … Defence lawyer 101 … if the prosecution has not proven their case… you make a motion to quash the charge. If they have proven your case… sit back and smile.

Dr Stanley Yaren was called by the crown as their star witness…. actually, their only witness.

Dr. Stanley Yaren described Li as a “decent person” who was clearly out of his mind when he believed he was acting on God’s orders to eliminate “the force of evil” and attacked Tim McLean.

Yaren said Li has made significant strides since being hospitalized after his arrest and could one day function again in the community — something Yaren admits doesn’t sit well with most people, including the victim’s family.

“I completely understand the need for a sense of justice, of retribution,” Yaren told Queen’s Bench Justice John Scurfield.

“But (Li) is as much of a victim of this horrible illness … as Mr. McLean is a victim. Don’t hate the person. Hate the illness.”

Yaren tells court he saw Li nineteen times, for a total of 12 hours. Who is Stanley Yaren… Doctor Stanley Yaren is Manitoba’s chief forensic psychiatrist… He has testified at other hearings… Although I have marked in bold some statements, you can formulate your own opinion!

R. v. Lowes:  Between Her Majesty the Queen, informant, and Kirk Lowes, accused

[1997] M.J. No. 549 Manitoba Provincial Court

Briefly summarized: The accused has pleaded guilty to an information charging him with the offence of distributing child pornography, contrary to Section 163.1(3)(a) of the Criminal Code. The Crown having proceeded by indictment, the maximum punishment is incarceration for a term not exceeding ten years.

Dr Stanley Yaren report for this case:

The psychiatric report prepared by Dr. Stanley Yaren, Psychiatrist, Health Sciences Centre, PsychHeath Centre, dated April 16, 1997 (contained in Exhibit 51):

“The reason for this assessment was explained to Mr. Lowes. He understood that our conversation was not confidential as I would be preparing this report for your use. He was completely cooperative, open and spontaneous throughout the assessment procedure. Mr. Lowes is facing charges in connection with distributing child pornography over the Internet. Mr. Lowes readily acknowledges and admits to the actions which led to the charges against him. He also acknowledges the wrongfulness and immorality of his behaviour. Based upon this assessment it is my opinion that Mr. Lowes’ involvement in the offending behaviour was not intentionally malicious was not done either for personal sexual gratification or for financial gain. Mr. Lowes first developed an interest in the Internet in December of 1996 at which time his home computer became connected to the Internet through a commercial Internet service provider. Mr. Lowes’ interest rapidly progressed to a fascination and then later an obsession. He started spending all of his spare time in front of the computer attempting to master the technology of the Internet. This type of experience was not new for Mr. Lowes or for his wife, as it was his usual practice when he was becoming involved in and learning about something new to totally immerse himself in it. Mr. Lowes eventually mastered the techniques of searching the Internet and discovered News Groups where he was able to access sexually explicit material of all kinds. He admits that initially he was somewhat titillated by the erotic material (but not the pedophiliac material). He states that the novelty soon wore off and the content became boring. He then became interested in exploring more deviant material. He derived excitement from the sense that he was exploring and accessing things that are usually forbidden. He viewed this more as a technical challenge than as something he was doing for sexual gratification. As I understand it he explored a number of areas of deviant sexuality not only pedophilia. Eventually Mr. Lowes sought to increase his technical skills and mastery as well as his exploration of the forbidden by getting into the process of exchanging pictures by electronic mail. Apparently Mr. Lowes was unaware of the fact that there are relatively simple techniques which can be used to exchange E-mail without having it traced back to the individual. Mr. Lowes appears to have been experimenting without giving much thought to the implications of his actions. Mr. Lowes states that by the time he was charged with the offences his interest in the Internet had already begun to wane and it had been several weeks since he had accessed or exchanged any of the pornographic material. He states that he was in the process of deleting the material from his computer hard drive as the pictures were using up all of his storage space. Mr. Lowes is 27 years old. He has no past history of mental disorder and no criminal record. He has been married for the past 2 1/2 years to a woman who he has known for the past 14 years. They are expecting their first child later this year. Mr. Lowes has some university education. He is steadily employed on a full-time basis in a semi-skilled job with a cable manufacturing company. Previously he has worked as a salesman. Mr. Lowes is a moderate drinker and he does not use illicit drugs. He is in good physical health . . . . .

Mr. Lowes indicates that he does not experience any deviant sexual arousal. He indicated that he worked in one of the first adult video stores in Winnipeg. Initially he found this job quite sexually exciting but he rapidly discovered that continuous exposure to explicit sexual material was boring, monotonous and he soon lost interest. It is interesting to note that this earlier experience seems to have been repeated in his more recent exposure to explicit material over the Internet. It appears that when he became bored with this material he pursued more deviant and forbidden material as a way of stimulating his interest. Mr. Lowes indicated that he and his wife are quite compatible sexually and that he does not experience any need for involvement in deviant sexual fantasies or practice. There is nothing based upon my examination to indicate that Mr. Lowes suffers from pedophilia or any other paraphilic disorder . . . . . I would not classify Mr. Lowes’ level of involvement in the Internet as a true addiction. I do not consider his interest in child pornography to be a manifestation of a pedophilic disorder. I do not identify any other mental disorder or condition requiring treatment or psychological intervention.”

end of report

Sounds like Kirk Lowes would also be a fine upstanding citizen who according to Mr Stanley Yaren, should be allowed to work at your local daycare.. thanks, but no thank… Kirk Lowes can watch your kids!

Li was not convicted of any crime. Based on the testimony of this Dr Stanley Yaren,  the judge was forced to make a judgement based on the evidence presented. Had the judge been presented with evidence allowing him to convict the defendant, there would have been minimum sentencing guidelines that would have been imposed.  But the judge was presented with Stanley Yaren’s professional opinion. Like the opinion I just shared….  This is why we need Tim’s Law.

We are looking for donations to offset the cost of getting the transcript of Dr Stanley Yaren testimony at the Li trial. Information on donating to the Tim’s Law effort can be found under the contact info at the top of the homepage.

The Humane Way

It’s pretty obvious we need new laws governing those found not criminally responsible for serious, violent offences, including murder.

The story of Vince Li, who stabbed, beheaded and mutilated carnival worker Tim McLean last year just outside of Portage la Prairie, is a perfect example.

I know all the do-gooders and the highbrow crowd think putting a guy like Li away for the rest of his life is inhumane and uncivilized.

They trot out all the psychiatric statistics and justifications for why we shouldn’t keep severely psychotic people like Li in secure custody forever.


They’re not really criminals. They didn’t really commit the offence, the illness did. And they should be given a chance to reintegrate. Yeah, we get it.

But for those of us who place greater weight on public safety, we say keeping Li off the streets forever is just common sense.

I keep hearing this argument that most people deemed not criminally responsible after killing someone don’t kill again after they’re released into the community.

Therefore, they don’t need to be locked up forever, the argument goes.

Well, the same could be applied to people who are found criminally responsible for homicide. Most of those don’t kill again either, most studies show. But we still hand out life sentences for first and second-degree murder.


I don’t see why under the Criminal Code we can’t sentence people deemed not criminally responsible for serious, violent offences to life in a secure facility.

Instead of a prison, a court would sentence them to a secure mental-health facility.

It would be humane, civilized and the right setting for people with severe mental health illnesses.

The reality is, there are all kinds of complicated reasons why people commit offences. Some people are controlled by their addictions, serious psychological afflictions from years of abuse and neglect, fetal alcohol syndrome, mental health issues not serious enough to warrant institutionalization, you name it.

Are those people responsible for their crimes? Did they know what they were doing? Did they know it was wrong?

Yes, no, maybe.

At some point did Vince Li know what he was doing was wrong when he dismembered Tim McLean? Did he have a lucid moment?

Not even Dr.Stanley Yaren, the forensic psychiatrists who testified at his trial could say for sure.

If we’re going to allow someone like Vince Li back on the street because he has a serious mental disorder, should we let the person with FAS convicted of second- degree murder out, too?

If not, why not? No doubt a bunch of high-priced lawyers and forensic psychiatrists could make a case for why the FAS offender shouldn’t be held responsible for his actions because he didn’t know what he was doing was wrong.

After all, it wasn’t his fault his mother drank during pregnancy.

No, we shouldn’t let the FAS killer out. We shouldn’t let the crack-addicted killer out. And we shouldn’t let Vince Li out.

All for the same reason: public safety. Put them in the right institution. Treat them humanely. Give them the treatment they require. Whatever.

But for goodness sake, don’t let them back on the street.

For excerpts of the agreed statement of facts in the Vince Li case, visit Brodbeck’s blog Raise a Little Hell at
News Columnists / Tom Brodbeck

Listen Up TV Poll… Interesting Returns

I came across an interesting poll, on Listen Up TV asking viewers what their reaction was to Tim McLean’s killer being found “not criminally responsible?”
I clicked my vote! And was taken to the results page… interesting.

The results showed almost 20% of respondents had no reaction to the verdict, and almost one in four felt sympathy for the killer.  Cast you vote here

Listen Up TV also did a very interesting segment on Tim’s murder, and efforts to enact Tim’s Law        When Justice Meets Horror – Episode #366

Disbelief 31%
Sympathy for the victim’s family 28%
Sympathy for the killer 23%
No reaction 19%

Who or what is to blame?

Posted on the blog “The Vanishing American

Oddly, there were two mass slayings in the news today, one of them at a school in Germany and another in Alabama, where 11 died.
I can only offer sympathies and prayers for the bereaved surviving family members and friends.

After such incidents, there is always the soul-searching in the media, with endless questions about ‘why’ the killer did what he did, as if any explanation really suffices. Inevitably, there are likely to be calls for stricter gun controls, although the German incident seems to undermine the liberal idea that strict gun laws prevent such occurrences. But nonetheless, there will be laments about the ease with which Americans can obtain guns, and there will be blanket condemnations of ‘society’ and its guilt in incidents like this. There is always disparaging talk about the South or heartland America in general, and its ‘gun culture’, as if that is the problem rather than simply human evil.

Why is it that so many people today have a problem identifying evil? If somebody kills most of their own family members, as the Alabama shooter did, is that act not evil? The German shooter apparently targeted mostly girls. Nowadays, what with feminism and with even many conservatives regarding women as more or less the same as men, it is not particularly seen as cowardly to target women or girls, though the code of chivalry would see it as such.

Most of all, though, incidents like these mass slayings always provoke more discussion of ‘mental illness’, as it is accepted by almost 100 percent of society that anyone who commits such crimes is automatically ‘sick’ or a victim of a mental disorder. Again, this obscures questions of good and evil, and individual responsibility.

That problem was also evident in the story I blogged on the other day, about the Chinese immigrant in Canada who savagely killed a Canadian bus passenger, in a particularly gruesome fashion.

On the discussion thread following that blog entry, reader and commenter Fed Up Canuck posted this link to the blog of Canadian radio commentator Charles Adler, who wrote about the court decision: Canada – Guilty of Gullibility in the First Degree.

Yes, it’s been a bit of a rough week. Not nearly as rough for me, as for the family of Tim McLean. But one of the reasons I sounded a bit rough yesterday, was because I was trying as hard as possible to be restrained, out of respect for the event that was fresh and raw. The event being a judge rendering a verdict of not guilty of criminal responsibility, in the case of the beheading of a young Canadian named Tim McLean. To me, it felt like he had just laid down a guilty verdict on all of us.

The Canadian people found guilty of allowing an elite group of experts, who do business in the legal system, telling us what is right and what is wrong.

The Canadian people found guilty for allowing themselves to believe that confining a mentally ill person for life is the equivalent of condemning all people suffering from any kind of mental illness.

The Canadian people found guilty for supporting a public school system where REASON is not taught and so vile arguments are presented in courts of law, and courts of public opinion go unchallenged by many members of the public who should know better, but have never been given the tools by an education system because it’s more about indoctrination than education.

The Canadian people have been found guilty for allowing their country to be stolen from them by the jackals of political correctness and moral equivalence and baffle gab.”

Adler’s commentary is sound, and it applies to America almost as much as Canada, and most of those who left comments agreed with him and shared his outrage. However there are a few typically obnoxious and piously self-righteous liberals who leave typically nasty comments.

Like this commenter:

Brilliant Charles. Do as the US does. Shoot the guy on site. Lovely. Vigilante justice. Won’t be accused of being ‘elite’ then! Why don’t you move to the states if you find their style of justice so soothing to your scared self. You can take comfort in the fact that they imprison more people than any other country in the world, yet still have the worst crime rates.” Continue reading Who or what is to blame?