Syrischer Flüchtling für strafrechtlich nicht haftbar gemacht, weil er nach dem tödlichen Absturz in Ontario nicht angehalten hat, erhält absolute Freilassung

To be clear this is only for leaving, then returning to, the crime scene.

>A judge sentenced Al Jalmoud last March to three years and three months behind bars.
Article content

>But Al Jalmoud only spent about six months in custody as he “has appealed against the convictions and sentence to the Ontario Court of Appeal. No date for the appeal has yet been set,” said the review board.

Everything else though…

Kill two people, hospitalize a third, and only spend 6 months in prison.

This man was driving without a license. But because he witnessed the horrors of the Syrian war and has PTSD they say he’s not criminally responsible for his reckless driving and the death of the two passengers in the vehicle he hit.

Hey fucking killed people while he was driving without a license. This guy should be locked up for a looooong time. Anyone want to place odds on how long this guy takes to fuck up and hurt someone else? This is not ok under any circumstances.

Judicial discretion is creeping toward leniency via multiple mechanisms. And, yet, some claim there’s nothing wrong with these sentences and verdicts and that we are wrong for criticizing the judiciary. As if any institution should be beyond reproach.

Yes, our laws *also* need to change. But, the judiciary is doing backflips to interpret law in increasingly questionable ways that handcuff the legislative branch (governments).

And, when successive governments attempt to pass law to unify Canadian desires with the laws, the judiciary sees them struck down by the supreme court.

So, we need to amend the constitution just to our unify laws with the social good. Great.

If only judges stopped interpreting it in an activist manner, we wouldn’t be in this shit show of a situation.

Edit: I’m paywalled. Anybody want to post the name of this criminal [I’m told it was a jury of reprobates, not a judge] ~~and the judge who enabled him~~? That’s in the public interest, to be sure. And, not doxing as it is in the public domain. Time to name and shame both these culprits.

We realllllllllllly need to end our two tier justice system

Deport.

Since it paywalled:

A Syrian refugee found not criminally responsible for failing to stop at an Ontario accident that killed two men and severely injured a third has received an absolute discharge, because he “does not at this time meet the threshold of significant threat to the safety of the public.”

But Al Jalmoud only spent about six months in custody as he “has appealed against the convictions and sentence to the Ontario Court of Appeal. No date for the appeal has yet been set,” said the review board.

“He was released from Collins Bay Penitentiary on September 24, 2025, on bail pending appeal.”

The review board pointed out “those matters are before the court and outside our jurisdiction.”

Al Jalmoud is subject to multiple conditions during his release, one of which permits him to leave home in the presence of his father.

The jury in Al Jalmoud’s criminal trial heard that, as a child, he “witnessed the horrors of the Syrian civil war, including bombings, airstrikes, killings in the street, mass and arbitrary arrests, and torture. He witnessed the effects of these horrors on his friends, neighbours and family. He was tortured himself. He developed a fear of police and military figures. The family fled to refugee camps in Lebanon, where they were mistreated.”

Al Jalmoud and his family came to Canada as refugees when he was 16 years old.

Two psychiatrists testified at his criminal trial that Al Jalmoud “suffered from (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) PTSD on the evening of September 25, 2022, that the PTSD led to a dissociative state triggered by Mr. Al Jalmoud’s encounter with the police officers in the white minivan, and that Mr. Al Jalmoud was in a dissociative state until he woke up in the hospital hours later. They both testified that Mr. Al Jalmoud was not in control of his actions. While he was capable of performing motor functions, he was not conscious or aware of what he was doing, either while driving away from the police or after the collision.”

Both experts were “of the view that Mr. Al Jalmoud was not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder” for failing to stop at the crash scene.

A different psychiatrist conducted a risk assessment of Al Jalmoud last year. He testified before the Ontario Review Board that Al Jalmoud “does not have risk factors including having a major mental illness, antisocial traits or antisocial personality disorder or substance use that would enhance risk,” said the decision.

“The evidence is that he has remorse for the tragic events he caused.”

The review board referenced a British Columbia court case that identified significant risk as a “real risk of physical or psychological harm to members of the public that is serious in the sense of going beyond the merely trivial or annoying,” said the decision.

“The conduct giving rise to the harm must be criminal in nature.”

The psychiatrist who interviewed Al Jalmoud last year “was asked whether he agreed with the evidence at trial that the sound of the collision could have triggered PTSD. He responded that while anything is possible just the sound would not lead to a PTSD response that would have led Mr. Al Jalmoud to fleeing the scene.”

The same psychiatrist testified that he was not asked to form an opinion on criminal responsibility regarding the charges.

“He expressed that he would have come to a different conclusion than the two psychiatric assessors at trial; that this was a young man who made an unbelievably unwise decision to drive given his skill set and panicked when he saw the police, knowing he was driving without a license and possibly without knowing how to drive. He accelerated, colliding with another vehicle, panicked, took off and came back.”

However, he “gave clear evidence that Mr. Al Jalmoud … does not at this time pose a significant threat to the safety of the public,” said the review board.

Al Jalmoud, who was 20 at the time of the crash and is now 24, “exhibits pro-social values of family connection, no substance use and pro-social future goals,” said the review board.

“While his behaviour on the date of the index offences included the anti-social act of driving illegally without a valid license and knowing, this being his first time ever driving in Canada, he was lacking driving skills, the evidence before us which we accept is that the likelihood of similar circumstances ever arising in the future is very remote and unlikely.”

Here’s [a link](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onrb/doc/2026/2026canlii23892/2026canlii23892.html?resultId=b86defd5afbb4bec9fd4f52742616ee6&searchId=2026-04-07T14:51:51:760/a89129dd40f249c7a368f5a222436221&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQASTW9oYW1hZCBhbCBqYWxtb3VkAAAAAAE) to the decision on an absolute discharge, for anyone who wants to make up their own mind. It was not made by a judge, but by a panel of doctors and civilians. The original decision was made by a jury.

I give it 2 months and he will be arrested again.

So what happened here? Was there like a gladue esque statement by him? What did the jury look like demographically? because wtf

I am so tired of immigrants coming into this country and not integrating or following any rules- but I’m even more sick of criminals being let go for major crime- he killed someone, WHY is he still here??? 

Sounds about right in Liberal Canada.

Curious why he was driving the car in the first place. Some pretty important reason right? RIGHT?