A “Catch-and-Release” Feeling — Even When Police Do Everything Right
Thunder Bay’s front-line reality is shaped by two forces at once: high levels of violent and non-violent crime, and a justice system that often moves slowly and inconsistently.
Statistics Canada reported Thunder Bay’s Crime Severity Index (CSI) at 107.7 in 2024, with a police-reported crime rate of 6,867 incidents per 100,000 people, both up 8% year-over-year. That context matters: when crime is elevated, every repeat incident feels like proof the system isn’t working.
Thunder Bay Police Service has acknowledged what many residents and officers say privately: frustration rises when repeat offenders are seen back in the community quickly, and it’s important to note that release decisions are made by courts after charges are laid—not by police.
Why Bail Keeps Breaking: Conditions Without Capacity
Bail is supposed to balance public safety with Charter rights, including the presumption of innocence. But the system can become a revolving door when conditions don’t match a person’s reality—especially for people with addictions.
If someone is released with a “no alcohol or drugs” condition but has no immediate access to detox, treatment, stable housing, or even basic supports, the condition can become a setup for failure. Breaches then pile up. The result is an escalating pattern: arrest → release with conditions → breach → release again → new offence.
One of the areas that likely needs to be examined is in the area of domestic violence. All too often there are instances that police charge the male, when the man is the real victim. The system is seemingly biased against the male partner.
Another area that leads to friction in the bail system is with couples and domestic violence where the court orders that the two have no contact with each other. That is almost a sure-fire path to failure. First often the accused doesn’t have anywhere else to go, and ends up back home. Many times it was an alcohol fuelled incident that led to the police and system becoming involved. There needs to be a far better means of dealing with these situations.
This isn’t about excusing harm.
It’s about recognizing that paper conditions without supervision and services can produce exactly what communities fear most: more repeat crime and less respect for the justice system.
Delays Undermine Accountability — and Can Collapse Cases Entirely
Thunder Bay’s justice system also struggles with delay, and delay corrodes confidence from every direction: victims wait, accused wait, police wait, and community safety suffers.
The Supreme Court of Canada’s R. v. Jordan set presumptive ceilings of 18 months (Provincial Court) and 30 months (Superior Court) from charge to end of trial—meant to end a “culture of delay.”
Cases in Thunder Bay often end up taking years to wind through the system.
When the courts can’t keep up, cases risk being stayed, and the public sees outcomes that look like “nothing happened,” even when serious work was done.
Thunder Bay has faced well-publicized local backlog pressures tied to Jordan realities.
Every month there are hearings at the court house in Thunder Bay addressing cases that going past the 18 month provincial and 30 month federal court requirements.
Indigenous Overrepresentation: When the System Deepens the Wound
Any honest discussion in Thunder Bay must confront a hard fact: Indigenous people are disproportionately impacted at every stage of the justice system.
Statistics Canada reported that 2.6% of the Indigenous adult population was incarcerated at some point during the 2023/2024 reference year (a custody involvement rate), with even higher rates among some age/sex groups. Federal Justice data also notes Indigenous adults’ continued overrepresentation in federal corrections admissions.
The risk is that reforms focused only on “stricter bail” can unintentionally widen this gap—especially if they don’t come with culturally grounded diversion, treatment, and reintegration capacity. Indigenous leaders and advocates have raised concerns that broad punitive shifts can worsen outcomes if root causes aren’t addressed.
Ottawa Is Tightening Bail — But Laws Alone Won’t Fix Thunder Bay
Canada has already been adjusting bail law in response to public safety concerns. Bill C-48 (2023) proposed new “reverse onus” rules targeting certain serious repeat violent offending with weapons, meaning detention becomes the starting point and the accused must show why release is justified.
In late 2025, the federal government also advanced broader proposed changes (the “Bail and Sentencing Reform Act,” Bill C-14), again aiming to make bail stricter for repeat and violent offending and to adjust sentencing tools.
At the same time, it’s worth remembering why earlier reforms happened: Bill C-75 (Royal Assent in 2019) modernized bail provisions and codified principles of restraint in part to reduce unnecessary pre-trial detention and address system inefficiencies.
Thunder Bay’s challenge is that law changes at the top won’t succeed locally unless the city also builds the capacity to supervise, treat, and reintegrate people—so conditions become achievable and repeat offending becomes less likely.
A Thunder Bay Blueprint: Converting the “Legal Industry” Into a Justice-and-Recovery System
If Thunder Bay wants fewer repeat offenders and more public confidence, the justice sector needs a practical, local conversion: from a court-only pipeline to a coordinated justice + health + housing continuum.
1) Make bail conditions enforceable by making them supportable
Scale up supervision and culturally grounded bail supports already operating in the city, including Indigenous bail verification and supervision models that help stabilize housing, connect services, and support compliance.
2) Expand “problem-solving” options that already exist locally
Thunder Bay has Indigenous-focused pathways designed to break cycles, including Drug Treatment Court supportsthat combine court oversight with treatment and case management.
Mental-health diversion and case-management supports also exist locally and can be strengthened through better coordination and faster referral pathways at first contact.
3) Use Gladue and Indigenous-led justice earlier and more consistently
Gladue principles apply whenever an Indigenous person’s liberty is at stake—including bail—and local Gladue services are available through regional providers.
The goal isn’t leniency; it’s accuracy—so courts understand risk, history, and realistic supports, and can impose plans that actually reduce future harm.
4) Build a “rapid stabilization” lane for addiction-driven offending
Thunder Bay’s repeat-offence loop often involves intoxication within hours or days of release. A justice system that works needs immediate stabilization options—rapid addictions medicine, withdrawal management pathways, and transitional supports—so release doesn’t mean immediate relapse.
5) Reduce delay with local operational discipline
Courts, Crowns, defence, police disclosure units, and duty counsel can adopt tighter shared timelines—because delay is not just an administrative problem; it’s a public safety problem. Ontario court leadership has emphasized that reducing delay requires coordinated action across all justice stakeholders.
6) Invest in reintegration so release isn’t a cliff
Reintegration supports—housing planning, ID, income supports, referrals—are where repeat offending is often prevented. Community reintegration and release planning programs exist locally and should be treated as “public safety infrastructure,” not optional social programming.
7) Create a shared accountability dashboard
If Thunder Bay wants trust, it needs transparent measurement:
-
average time from charge to bail hearing and to trial,
-
breach rates by condition type,
-
program completion rates (treatment court, diversion),
-
housing placement outcomes on release,
-
repeat-offending rates after participation in supports.
8) Stop mistaking “more conditions” for “more safety”
Sometimes fewer, smarter conditions—paired with real supervision and services—outperform long lists that no one can realistically follow. That’s how the system reduces both breaches and new victims.
The Bottom Line: Public Safety and Second Chances Are the Same Goal
Thunder Bay’s residents want safety. Police want their work to stick. Lawyers want cases resolved fairly and on time. Communities want fewer people cycling through trauma, addiction, custody, and release.
The path forward isn’t a single new law. It’s a local conversion: bail decisions tied to supervision, treatment tied to the court process, Gladue and Indigenous-led solutions used consistently, and reintegration treated as prevention.
If Thunder Bay can align those pieces, the city can reduce repeat crime and rebuild respect for the justice system—one outcome the entire community can agree on.
