top of page
  • Instagram
  • MailIcon
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • MailIcon

Lethbridge Herald: Canada’s Revolving Door of Justice Is Costing Lives

Updated: Aug 5

“If you want to commit a crime, come to Canada.”


These were the harrowing words spoken by the mother of Laura Furlan after her daughter was brutally murdered in a Calgary park by Christopher Ward Dunlop. Fifteen years later, on February 16, 2025, Dunlop claimed another life—that of Judy Maerz—in the very same park.


The comment may sound extreme, but it reflects a hard and painful truth: Canada’s justice system is failing. A known killer was given the freedom to reoffend. Two women are dead, and two families are forever changed—all because a violent offender was granted another chance.


Statistics Canada reports that violent crime has surged by 55 per cent in recent years. While many factors contribute to this increase, there’s no denying the role of weak bail policies and a soft-on-crime approach that has turned the justice system into a revolving door for repeat offenders.


What we’re seeing is not just a policy failure—it’s a public safety crisis.


In July, Bailey McCourt—a mother of two from Kelowna, B.C.—was brutally attacked and killed with a hammer. The man charged with her murder was her ex-husband, James Plover. He now faces a second-degree murder charge and is waiting to be sentenced.


At the time of the murder, Plover was out on bail. His release cost just $500.


To McCourt’s grieving family, this isn’t just shocking—it’s proof that something is deeply wrong with Canada’s bail system. In response, they’ve put forward four recommendations to the federal government. At the top of the list: reforming bail rules for high-risk domestic offenders.


They’re also asking that courts be required to consider lethality risk indicators—warning signs that suggest a person may seriously harm or kill their partner—when deciding whether someone should be granted bail.


This tragedy, and the weak legal response that followed, has left many Canadians wondering: how many more lives have to be lost before meaningful change is made?


Sadly, this pattern repeats itself across the country. In December 2022, Const. Greg Pierzchala of Ontario was shot and killed in the line of duty by two men—both out on bail. Const. Pierzchala’s death sparked a rare and unified call to action from Canada’s leading police associations. Officers across the country are urging the federal government to reform the very bail policies that allowed this tragedy to happen.


Despite clear evidence that the system is broken, the government continues to delay meaningful reform. When Conservative MP Frank Caputo raised the issue during debate on Bill C-2, highlighting that the legislation did not address bail, Liberal MPs mocked him.

Canadians want and deserve bail reform. We want a justice system that takes violent offenders seriously and prioritizes the safety of law-abiding citizens over the comfort of criminals.


It is unacceptable that someone who plots to bomb a synagogue, stating his goal was “to kill as many Jews as possible,” walks away with 60 days of house arrest. This is not justice—it is a dangerous erosion of public trust.


Just last month in Ontario, 36-year-old Medhani Yohans—already facing charges related to violence and sexual assault—was arrested again only 24 hours after being released. His new charges included breaching probation, disobeying court orders, and criminal harassment.


This cycle of release and reoffending is exhausting our police forces, putting communities at risk, and leaving victims without protection. A justice system that allows repeat offenders to walk free is one that fails in its most basic duty.


Law enforcement officials have told me directly: they are frustrated, exhausted, and demoralized. They work hard to keep us safe, only to see their efforts undone by weak policies that favour offenders over public safety.


Across Canada, people are losing faith in the justice system—and rightly so. The message being sent is that even the most serious crimes carry little consequence, and that repeat offenders will be given endless second chances.


We cannot let that message stand.


The lives of Laura Furlan, Judy Maerz, Bailey McCourt, and Constable Greg Pierzchala were not just statistics. They were people with families, futures, and the right to feel safe in their own communities. Their deaths are the direct result of a system that refuses to adapt to the growing threat of violent crime.


Bail reform is not a partisan demand. It is a moral imperative. It is the bare minimum we should expect from a government responsible for protecting its citizens.


Bail reform isn’t just a political debate; it’s a matter of life and death.

 

 

 

 

 
 
 

3 Comments


Some good reading for Rachael: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/28/magazine/charlie-kirk-rhetoric.html


Too bad the article doesn't mention her. Thomas should get all the recognition she deserves for contributing to legitimizing extremist hateful views - and what's worse, presenting them as "family values" in the House of Commons.


Did Rachael lose whatever was remaining of her conscience or is she going to exercise what normal people refer to as decency and apologize to Canadians for whitewashing homophobic, transphobic, misogynist and racist views?

Like

Rachael Thomas said in the House of Commons that Charlie Kirk represented "family values".

Here is an example of what Charlie Kirk's organization stood for: "In 2022, after three Black football players were killed at another college, Meg Miller, president of Turning Point’s chapter at the University of Missouri, “joked” in a social media message, “If they would have killed 4 more n-ggers we would have had the whole week off.”


Could Rachael clarify for Canadians if this is what she referred to as "family values"? Also, does she understand the gravity of her actions - celebrating a white suprematist in the HOUSE OF COMMONS?


Conservatives were the first to scream about Liberals inviting a Nazi. If you have any…

Like

Hey Rachael Thomas - I just saw a clip of your speech in Canadian Parliament celebrating Charlie Kirk - a notorious bigot, white suprematist, racist, misogynist, homophobe and transphobe.


Yes, speech should be free - except for hate speech, and debates shouldn't be resolved with violence. Except that calling to stone gay people to death or saying that black people are not smart enough to fly a plane is not some mere "opinion" or a "view". It's hatred, plain and simple, and hatred is not something to debate but to reject. And it's hatred that resulted in many marginalized people being harmed, all in the name of imaginary debate.


Did you actually read any of what Kirk said? I doubt…


Like
bottom of page