Family of homeless man killed in alleged ‘swarm’ attack speaks out against juvenile justice laws

The family of the man allegedly killed by a group of teenagers in a downtown “swarm” attack questions the juvenile justice system and the ongoing secrecy of the case in a new public statement.

“He was a proud man who had fallen and wanted to learn to stand on his own knowing that he always had his family behind him,” Eric Shum wrote of his brother-in-law Ken Lee, 59, who was last killed. month. Eight teens ages 13 to 16 have been charged with second-degree murder after they allegedly assaulted and stabbed him. Police believe the girls may have been trying to steal alcohol from Lee’s partner.

The statement said Lee “was a kind soul with a heart of gold” and was not homeless due to any substance abuse issues. They asked for privacy as they continue their mourning.

He went on to challenge the Juvenile Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) that governs criminal cases involving youth, arguing that it “protects young offenders and not victims or the public.”

Shum questioned why the identities of people accused of “serious” crimes are kept secret from the public when police are actively seeking more victims and witnesses and why girls are eligible for bail.

The Star previously reported that police suspect the same teens were involved in a series of random attacks along TTC Line 1 and that investigators are asking anyone with information to come forward. The girls have not been charged in any of those incidents.

One girl already received bail. Additional hearings for the girls still in custody are scheduled this month, including one for Friday morning.

The statement came the same day a judge ruled on a media request to gain access to the girls’ case records.

Judge Sheilagh O’Connell ruled on Thursday that the media could have access to some records but not to others, records that are otherwise protected from public view under the YCJA. Although O’Connell agreed that the media had a valid interest in the records, she said there was a “risk” of “unintentional or accidental” publication of details that would identify the girls. Records made available will have all identifying details redacted. Other documents, such as evidence presented at a bond hearing for one of the girls, will not be accessible.

The judge’s decision highlighted a case from the Supreme Court of Canada where the justices wrote that “because of their age, young people have increased vulnerability, less maturity and a reduced capacity for moral judgment” that “entitles them to a presumption of guilt or diminished moral culpability”. That’s consistent, O’Connell wrote, with the YCJA’s principle of “limiting stigmatization” of youth under criminal suspicion.

Under the charter, youth charged with a crime also have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and the right to apply for bail.

SHARE: