The following Opinion Editorial by Social Sciences Component Director, Jan Henley, was published in the April 28th edition of the Winnipeg Free Press.
In recent news stories, Probation Officers have been singled out for not filing breaches against offenders who don’t follow their court-ordered conditions of release. It is important to remember that Probation Officers are just one component of an integrated justice system that includes police, crowns, court systems, judges, sheriff’s officers and corrections.
The job of a probation officer is to gather information, assess and determine risk levels, and develop intervention plans with the goal of reducing further offenses while maintaining public safety. This involves working with families and other resources in the community.
Conservative Leader Hugh McFayden has called for a zero tolerance policy. If a zero tolerance approach to breaches were put in place it would cripple the justice system. Currently in Manitoba, there are between 10,000 and 12,000 outstanding warrants (which include breaches) in the system.
If everyone who had warrants filed against them were apprehended, there wouldn’t be enough jail cells in Canada to hold everyone. In Manitoba alone, our correctional facilities are already at 150% capacity. And because everyone working in the justice system is short on resources, filing a breach against someone wouldn’t guarantee immediate apprehension. For probation officers, some of whom have caseloads with as many as 120 offenders, a disproportionate amount of their work would be spent filing breaches and it would require a large increase in available police officers to apprehend offenders.
The system works this way: once an offender is convicted of an offence, a judge may impose conditions which require a probation officer’s supervision.
At this point, the assigned probation officer conducts an assessment to determine the risk level of the offender and what interventions are required to support the goal of reducing reoffending and maintaining public safety. Throughout the supervision period, the probation officer regularly monitors and assesses the offenders’ level of risk and compliance to the court ordered conditions.
When the offender breaches court ordered conditions, a probation officer investigates the circumstances of the breach. Legislation allows for Probations Officers to use their discretion in determining if filing a breach is necessary. This use of discretion in determining if a breach is required is guided by departmental policies and done in consultation with colleagues, supervisors, and crown attorneys as needed. Key factors in exercising this discretion include ensuring public safety and understanding the intent behind the offenders’ behaviour.
For instance, a Probation Officer would not file a breach if someone is 10 minutes late for a curfew due to a bus being behind schedule or an offender had child-care issues. After due consideration, the probation officer would then make a decision whether or not to lay a charge that the offender has breached their court-ordered conditions.
If it is determined that a breach has occurred, the next step involves a magistrate issuing either a warrant for arrest or a summons to appear in court. The summons or warrant, once issued, is sent to the police to be executed. This means the police are now responsible for apprehending the offender. The timeframe for that happening can vary from days to years, with some court ordered conditions expiring before police can execute the summons or warrant.
Once apprehended, the offender will remain in custody until police release them (sometimes within hours), they are granted bail, or a further determination is made by the courts. As part of the legal process, breach charges are dealt with like any other offence, with results that might include jail time, court ordered conditions requiring further supervision of probation officer and fines. Breaches can also be used as part of a plea bargain.
All components of the legal system (including probation services, police, crown attorneys, sheriff’s officers, courts systems and corrections) play a crucial role in ensuring public safety in our communities. Each part of the justice community is struggling under the strain of working excessive case loads with minimal resources. At the same time, each part of the justice community strives to contribute to public safety the best they can under extremely difficult circumstances. To lay blame on one part of the system is unfair and uninformed.