Charges dropped against rural Alberta homeowner

[Kurt505]

I like the way this guy thinks.

http://edmontonsun.com/opinion/colum...0-68b0a4f4f04a

[kevinhits]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I like the way this guy thinks.

http://edmontonsun.com/opinion/colum...0-68b0a4f4f04a

WOW....Gunter is my hero....Thank God someone finally spoke the truth and shares his infinite wisdom.......He speaks the TRUTH....

Now what will change going forward?

[Dick284]

Originally Posted by kevinhits

Now what will change going forward?

Nothing.

We don’t have property rights in this country.

The charges were dropped, meaning no judge heard the case.

Until our property rights are enshrined, the right to defend your property is pretty much non existent.

We can only defend with deadly force, our flesh and blood. And you better have all your goslings in a row if you do.


Come to think of it, do you think a LEO can just up and shoot someone who is stealing some property?

[kevinhits]

Originally Posted by Dick284

Nothing.

We don’t have property rights in this country.

The charges were dropped, meaning no judge heard the case.

Until our property rights are enshrined, the right to defend your property is pretty much non existent.

We can only defend with deadly force, our flesh and blood. And you better have all your goslings in a row if you do.


Come to think of it, do you think a LEO can just up and shoot someone who is stealing some property?

Exactly....does not matter what we do, nothing will change....

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by kevinhits

Exactly....does not matter what we do, nothing will change....

Perception is reality to a lot of people. In this case perception is fact as he shot someone trying to steal his property and he got off..........its as simple as that.

Legally things may not have changed but the perception to a lot of people sure as heII did.

Hard to believe that people can't realize that.

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Perception is reality to a lot of people. In this case perception is fact as he shot someone trying to steal his property and he got off..........its as simple as that.

Legally things may not have changed but the perception to a lot of people sure as heII did.

Hard to believe that people can't realize that.

Agree

[FQ2]

Glad to hear this.

[kevinhits]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Perception is reality to a lot of people. In this case perception is fact as he shot someone trying to steal his property and he got off..........its as simple as that.

Legally things may not have changed but the perception to a lot of people sure as heII did.

Hard to believe that people can't realize that.

I actually totally agree with your statement.....

[urban rednek]

Great column by Licia Corbella and accompanying video clip of Eddie & Jessica Maurice's ongoing fight against rural crime:
https://calgarysun.com/news/local-ne...3-1a141a4a6ece

Their comments (in the video) about the content of the meetings in Ottawa are not surprising.

Weird.

That’s how Eddie Maurice described standing in front of the Okotoks RCMP detachment with his wife Jessica to discuss rural crime. After all, for the rural homeowner, his arrest at gunpoint by several RCMP officers was almost as traumatic as the middle-of-the night robbery that “turned his life upside down” and turned him into the face of the scourge of rural crime that has gripped small communities clear across the country.

“It’s kind of weird being here outside of the RCMP detachment because my experiences here haven’t been that great,” Maurice said Monday during a media conference put on by John Barlow, the Conservative MP for Foothills.

“That frosted window over there is the cell I was kept in for 36 hours after protecting my family and property from criminals in the dark,” he said, pointing to a thin window located further down the building.

It was the early morning hours of Feb. 24 — Eddie’s 33rd birthday — when the family’s two dogs, Panda and Jackson, became agitated and alerted the machinist, who also helps run his wife’s family farm. Jessica — who owns and runs a doggie daycare — was away in Las Vegas. Her parents were taking care of the couple’s older daughter and Eddie was home alone with their baby daughter.

“When I woke up to the sound of criminals outside my house, I was terrified,” he recalled.

He grabbed his .22-calibre rifle, went outside and ordered the two people breaking into his truck to leave his property. They just ignored him.

“After firing warning shots into the ground, the criminals ran away and I called 9-1-1.”
It took more than two hours for the Mounties to finally show up, though he lives just a seven-minute drive from the detachment. Three cruisers arrived. With guns drawn, the officers arrested the young father and handcuffed him.

“I was treated like a criminal instead of the victim and that needs to stop,” he said.

What also needs to stop, he adds, are two federal government bills — Bill C-71 and Bill C-75.

“Bill C-71 establishes a back door gun registry and is another attack on law-abiding firearms owners,” said Barlow, who was touting the Conservative Party’s Safer Canada plan instead.

“Bill C-75 reduces sentences on some of our most violent crimes, including drinking and driving causing bodily harm, assault and even kidnapping. What kind of message is this sending to violent criminals?” asks Barlow.

“Instead of taking action to combat rural crime, this bill actually reduces sentences. That is simply outrageous,” added Barlow.

The Maurices say when they first bought their house just south of Okotoks over six years ago, thieves attempted to break into their home while they were sleeping “and after they called, police never came at all.”

“We lost our sense of security at that time,” explained Jessica, who says they became even more jumpy since the incident that got Eddie arrested, charged and transformed into an unwitting poster boy of the fear and anger that is gripping Alberta rural folk.

In June, a ballistics report confirmed Eddie’s version of the events that night. It was proven that a ricocheted bullet hit the man who was attempting to steal from him. All charges against Eddie were dropped to cheers and tears from a large crowd of supporters gathered at the Okotoks court, some of whom drove to each of his six court appearances from as far away as Edmonton.

“Once you are a victim of rural crime, there is no going back to normal life,” explains Eddie, who installed alarmed motion sensors around their property as well as video cameras.

“We’ve become hyper vigilant now,” adds Jessica. “We’re always on edge.”

In March, the Alberta NDP government — in response to the public outcry against how Eddie Maurice was victimized not just by criminals, but the system — invested a total of $14 million in more RCMP officers, civilian staff and Crown prosecutors.

The Alberta government’s Crime Reduction Strategy appears to be working. In September, RCMP said there were 366 fewer break and enters and 648 less motor vehicle thefts this year compared to last.

From January to July of 2018, property crimes excluding fraud, mischief and arson, have declined 11 per cent compared to the same period last year.

But Barlow says those numbers are misleading.

“So many people are not reporting these crimes any more,” he says. “They know the RCMP may or may not respond and they can’t event get insurance, they’ve been hit so many times.”

“They’re just dealing with it themselves because they are afraid the RCMP will arrest them if they scare away thieves with a firearm,” says Jessica.

The Maurices hope that Bills C-71 and C-75 get as much attention as Eddie’s case did, otherwise the proverbial revolving door for habitual criminals will get even faster. That won’t just be weird, it will be gross.

Licia Corbella is a Postmedia columnist.

[amosfella]

Originally Posted by Dick284

Nothing.

We don’t have property rights in this country.

The charges were dropped, meaning no judge heard the case.

Until our property rights are enshrined, the right to defend your property is pretty much non existent.

We can only defend with deadly force, our flesh and blood. And you better have all your goslings in a row if you do.


Come to think of it, do you think a LEO can just up and shoot someone who is stealing some property?

Property rights do exist. However, who owns the property? If you haven't completed transfer of the property title, the Crowns holds it till it's properly transferred. You don't have any rights in that property, other than use, till it's transferred properly.

[Ken07AOVette]

Originally Posted by amosfella

Property rights do exist. However, who owns the property? If you haven't completed transfer of the property title, the Crowns holds it till it's properly transferred. You don't have any rights in that property, other than use, till it's transferred properly.

Occupied property is ownership in the eyes of the court, or renters or family members would have no rights

[Imagehunter]

“That frosted window over there is the cell I was kept in for 36 hours"

That's ridiculous. What did they think he would do? Flee the country? Try to find the two guys and finish them off even though he could have done that while waiting for the cops to finally show up? Can't imagine what this guy must have gone through in there.

[Ken07AOVette]

Originally Posted by Imagehunter

That's ridiculous. What did they think he would do? Flee the country? Try to find the two guys and finish them off even though he could have done that while waiting for the cops to finally show up? Can't imagine what this guy must have gone through in there.

Not sticking up for anyone, but imagine the uproar if due process was not followed had it been the criminals in the frosted window call for 36 hours? Or 360 or 3600 hours?

They may have saved his life, there may have been others out looking for vengeance.... well that is a huge WAG, but you get my point. In the grand scheme of things, if he was not water boarded or tortured with a car battery clamped to his nipples he came out unscathed.

[amosfella]

Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette

Occupied property is ownership in the eyes of the court, or renters or family members would have no rights

That's categorically incorrect. Occupied property is usufruct, and you only have the rights that the Crown grants you. I've hardly seen where the courts said that the property is owned, only possessed. The media twisting it, and personal perception does not negate that distinction.

Ownership is a different deal altogether.

Most folks don't realize that there are 2 titles to any property. One allows you use, and the other one gives ownership.

Also, most folks don't understand that land is one title, and real estate is another title.

There's a duality in titles. The titles can be merged, but they are split again when the property is transferred. There's a legal title, and there's an equitable title to everything. Most only get the legal title.

https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/...ext=fss_papers

Read the first paragraph of Delivery and Acceptance of Deeds. See where it talks about acceptance being as important as the delivery?? Probably read it a few times. Did you write Service Alberta a thank you note??

Now, have a look at this document:

http://www.servicealberta.ca/pdf/ltmanual/MER-1.pdf

It's talking about a lot of things at the same time. The first 2 paragraphs are very important.

If you look at Section 29 (?) of the Land Titles Act, it basically says that land is held under Letters Patent, AKA Crown Grants. If you look into the Criminal code section 2 the definitions for 'Property', 'Public stores', and 'Municipality', You may see that it states that land not held under Letters Patent is community property, and is not individually owned. Also, in the Criminal Code, you'll see that property is held in 'peaceful possession'. I believe that that's generally because property is assumed to belong to the municipality as part of the public stores.

[Imagehunter]

His wife was gone, he had a small child, dogs and his property to look for (the revenge you mentioned could just be another visit clearing him out knowing he is gone), so I think being locked up 36 hrs is way too much since he was the victim and not a known criminal and threat. Didnt know it's mandatory but it doesn't need torture to be a complete nightmare in that situation.

[Oldan Grumpi]

I'm going to have to hang up a bunch of plow shares and 8" flanges all over the yard and put an empty barrel in the middle, and practice bank shots with milsurp ball ammo all day long.

I've lost well over $50K worth of stuff to thieves over the past 10 or 15 years, if I catch one in the act it could get messy.

[Vigilante]

Originally Posted by Oldan Grumpi

I'm going to have to hang up a bunch of plow shares and 8" flanges all over the yard and put an empty barrel in the middle, and practice bank shots with milsurp ball ammo all day long.

I've lost well over $50K worth of stuff to thieves over the past 10 or 15 years, if I catch one in the act it could get messy.

Just Invest in a good backhoe.

[Talking moose]

Quit paying your property tax if you’d like to see who really owns “your” property. You’ll find out.

[amosfella]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Quit paying your property tax if you’d like to see who really owns “your” property. You’ll find out.

Property tax is the rent payable to the owner of the land. The owner of the land is the one currently in possession of the Crown Grant. The Crown is collecting the rents to hold in trust for when the beneficiary of the owner of the land steps forward.

[amosfella]

Also, the reason that Property protection laws are such a mess is that ALL property law has to come from the provinces. This makes things difficult when criminal law can only come from the federal level. It's created piles of messy court challenges, and constitutional conferences in the past.

[Taiga]

Your posts are absolute utter nonsense. They do not describe our land title system at all. Nor is a paper from Yale of any relevance here in Western Canada.

[^v^Tinda wolf^v^]

Im glad it worked out for him and his family.
I’m willing to part with personal possessions but at anytime I feel my family’s life or my life is in danger at any place or time I will use what ever I have to stop that threat. I’ve heard the no you would nots here several times and always snicker about it. Cold

[amosfella]

Originally Posted by Taiga

Your posts are absolute utter nonsense. They do not describe our land title system at all. Nor is a paper from Yale of any relevance here in Western Canada.

Then please tell me how it works...

[powersteve]

Originally Posted by amosfella

Most folks don't realize that there are 2 titles to any property. One allows you use, and the other one gives ownership.

Also, most folks don't understand that land is one title, and real estate is another title.

There's a duality in titles. The titles can be merged, but they are split again when the property is transferred. There's a legal title, and there's an equitable title to everything. Most only get the legal title.

I'm having trouble finding information to back this up.

Are there always 2 titles? Are they separate documents or just conceptual and combined on the single land title document? Can you provide any example of separate legal and equitable titles for an Alberta property?

[Taiga]

Our land title system is based on the Torrens system, in which title is guaranteed. At the heart of this is the doctrine of indefeasible title. Every uncancelled indefeasible title is conclusive evidence at law against the Crown and all other persons, that the person named in the title is indefeasibly entitled to an estate in fee simple to the land described in the title. Only exceptions being Crown grant exclusions, as listed on title, expropriation for the public good, and taxes. There are not multiple titles. The system guarantees there is only one title.

[Norwest Alta]

What I find the most troubling in this case and the Stanley case is how the victum gets turned into the crimminal and has to spend tens of thousands of dollars or more to clear their name. Could a board of inquiry not decide if he should be charged or was justified in doing what he was doing?

[elkhunter11]

It's not coincidence that the vast majority of the suspects involved are repeat offenders. Most have firearms prohibitions, yet are in possession of firearms. If our catch and release legal system actually dealt with these offenders they wouldn't be running around committing more crimes, and they wouldn't get shot.

[amosfella]

Originally Posted by powersteve

I'm having trouble finding information to back this up.

Are there always 2 titles? Are they separate documents or just conceptual and combined on the single land title document? Can you provide any example of separate legal and equitable titles for an Alberta property?

There's not always 2 titles. But those situations are very specific. The lesser title will always merge with the greater title.

Dad had a friend that had bought a chunk of land in Rockyview. The real estate agent was an old guy who asked her if she wanted the title done in such a way that her partner could never get the land. She said yes, and her title was not given to her on 8.5" x 14" colored paper. (some call this the color of title) It was on a 11" x 17" white paper with actual raised seals on it. And it said 'Crown Grant' at the top.

The county got mad at her for building some straw bale chicken houses on that land, and went to court for permission to bulldoze them. She only took her title in and just gave it to the judge on the day. The judge reamed the county lawyer a new butt hole, and told them that that land was not part of their municipality. When the judge asked if the county wanted to proceed with their arguments, the lawyer declined, and asked to withdraw.

The title on the smaller paper has less rights associated with it. In many cases, you can only use the top 6' of the surface of the land, generally doesn't include mineral rights, etc. The Crown Grant is different. It includes everything granted, and the land down to the point in the center of the earth, to the edge of the atmosphere.

It's interesting that Taiga says that a title under the Torrens system... ENTITLES one to an estate in fee simple. 'Entitled' does not meant that you actually have it. I actually meant that you can get it.

The Law of Property Act Section 62 talks about it. However, it took me almost 2 years of studying equity to understand what it was referring to.

It's also interesting that Taiga said that the Yale law paper I posted isn't of any use here. I disagree. Law papers and books from Canada, US, India, South Africa, England, etc., all say the same thing. It's just that the paper from Yale had the simplest worded explanation that I've seen. Also, in North America, most of the States and the western provinces west of the Mississippi and the Red Rivers use the Torrens system with the rules almost exactly like Alberta's.

Another interesting example of two titles is the Ring Road crap show in Calgary. Native land is held under Letters Patent. As I recall, there were multiple court cases where Alberta and the City of Calgary tried to sue the native band for expropriation of their land to build the southwest part of the ringroad. The Native Band always won.

And yet, somehow, if you didn't want to sell your house, and the city wanted to build a road through it, they could expropriate it when ever they want, so long as the correct legal processes were followed.

Apparently, Ontario even uses Torrens for newly granted land. Here's a lady who is a paralegal in a land law office talking about letters patent on land.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UotfgawVd5c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLzzNoC2N-A&t=1s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=441AnzB-AtI

[Taiga]

Well you can make up and believe whatever property rights system you want, but the fact remains that the system you are describing and misinterpreting is not in place in Alberta.