Posted by: Lindsay C on: January 28, 2010
This article was originally published in the Globe and Mail on January 26th, 2010. The article was written by Oliver Moore.
In Nova Scotia there is a man who is commonly known by the police as “Super Naugle.” Terry Naugle has had 36 convictions throughout his adult life. He was released last February after a three year prison term on charges that were related to drinking and driving. One month later, he was arrested again. He pleaded guilty to driving impaired, fleeing the scene of the accident, refusing a Breathalyzer and driving without a license. It’s expected Naugle will get a light sentence, which angers Julia McMillan, “It’s really scary to live in a country where this is as good as it gets. In our Criminal Code, Terry Naugle will have to kill someone to be locked up indefinitely,” she says. The drunk- driving charges carry a maximum term of five years says a spokesperson for the provincial prosecution service. The Crown attorney will not give any indication as to how much jail time she will recommend. But it’s expected that the sentence will not be indefinite. Many who know Naugle believe that he will never change. Margaret Miller, national president of Mother Against Drunk Driving says, “he’ll be back out doing the same thing. Cases like his, I honestly don’t know how to stop him.” Also, Ontario law professor Robert Solomon, an expert on impaired driving at the University of Western says “If the only way to keep these people off the roads and from endangering your family is to incarcerate them, then I think the interest of public safety outweighs the concern and cost.” But, in Terry Naugle’s case he has never killed or seriously injured anyone and has had a string of short sentences. The loophole is Naugle hasn’t faced a charge that carried a possible 10 year sentence, which is mandatory when seeking long-term dangerous-offender status. “Does it take blood on the pavement to have him declared a dangerous offender?” Margaret Miller asks. Pamela Stephens, a spokeswoman for Justice Minister Rob Nicholson stated in an email that “drunk drivers endanger the life or safety of another person and could thus fulfill the dangerous-offender requirement of serious personal injury offences and we are therefore confident that these provisions can be applied to court.”
This article is important because it’s a public safety issue. Regardless that this man is from a different province, everyone should be aware of this issue.
He’s so infamous the police have a nickname for him “Super Naugle.” It’s rather sad thinking that this man is still let out on the streets. Regardless that he hasn’t killed anyone; he’s obviously a danger to society. He has repeat offences up the ying yang most of his adult life, 36 convictions to be exact. Shouldn’t that be enough? The law prevents Naugle from being considered a dangerous-offender because he hasn’t faced a charge that carried a possible 10 year sentence. Shouldn’t Naugle’s past be a factor when it comes time for him to be sentenced? I believe it should. Even people who know him believe that he will never change. All of these factors are what stand against him, but the law protects him. How fair is that for the families who have been directly affected by his carelessness?
Well let’s look back, September 9th, 2009 Roger Walsh was slapped with a life sentence which was his 19th impaired-driving conviction. Walsh is the first drunk driver to be handed this long of a sentence. Now let’s look at Naugle, the difference is Naugle hasn’t killed or seriously injured anyone. But like what Margaret Miller said “Does it take blood on the pavement to have him declared a dangerous offender?” Does it? Because that’s what it looks like. Shouldn’t Naugle be considered a dangerous offender? His carelessness for everyone else is a danger to society. The fact that he has repeated his action shows his disregard for others. Obviously the long string of jail terms hasn’t taught him anything. If someone has had 36 related convictions, shouldn’t that be the light bulb above law enforcements heads that maybe this man will never change. Maybe the next time he does this someone might get hurt. Isn’t it the law enforcements jobs and the governments to avoid this situation from occurring? To make sure that the public is safe? Laws need to be changed, because apparently nothing is working. It shouldn’t take someone to do the same thing 36 times for someone to say, hey maybe we should do something! Something should have been done a lot earlier!
April 7, 2010 at 2:54 pm
[...] is a follow up blog to a blog I had done previously, before Naugle was convicted. Terry Naugle is a fifty-three –year-old man who has been in and out [...]