Karla free and clear
Karla Homolka is now free as a bird.
No conditions on her parole, no restrictions of any kind, no nothing.
This could be a problem for the Liberals. A development like this could be a flashpoint for the undercurrent of anger surrounding the Canadian justice system (even though it was the Bob Rae-led Ontario NDP government who negotiated the sweetheart deal with her in the first place.) Martin better get out in front of this one or it could blow up in his face in the 905 area code, especially. If I were him, I'd talk about the need for a review of the corrections and conditional release system in Canada. This is an issue that is tailor-made for the Conservatives, and Martin cannot afford to look soft on violent crime.
posted by Road Hammer @ 2:04 PM
6 comments
6 Comments:
The judge was absolutely right. Like it or not, the woman served her full sentance - it was not a conditional sentance so I don't get your point about chaning that system.
If parole board had been smart about it, they would have paroled her with conditions 2 or 3 years ago to reintegrate her... but the public outcry would have been massive... so they screwed themselves again. The conditions imposed on her release after the full sentance were unprecedented and bascically illegal, as the judge found.
Blaming this on Bob Rae's government is beyond comical. I didn't know the prosecuter was part of the Rae cabinet?
What do you think would resonate more with the public in a campaign: "Too bad, she served her sentence so let her live her life in peace" or "It's true, the corrections and conditional release system is not perfect and so I think it should be reviewed."
I would think the latter.
As for the Dipper connection, Marion Boyd, London social worker and notorious man-hater, was in the Cabinet as attorney general during the time that the poor little victim otherwise known as Karly-kurls showed up with her black eyes on the front pages of the Toronto Sun and got her sweetheart deal.
Prosecutors report to the provincial AG, and in a case this hot, Boyd would have certainly had to sign off on it since it was such a controversial issue at the time.
Exactly Hammer. Does anyone really believe that Crown Attornies operate independently of the ministry and minister to whom they report?
Too bad Bob Rae didn't take a Liberal nomination. Then Martin really could have worn it.
Again - you clearly don't understand what a conditional release is.... Homolka was not conditionally released - you can't place conditions on someone who has served a full sentance.
Conditions can be imposed at the time of statutory release if the person is labelled a dangerous offender. It's rare that this happens, but that's what the Quebec courts originally did this past summer and what the Crown is going to advocate when they appeal.
Breaking it down:
Conditional release = parole with partial sentence served
Statutory release = no parole because full sentence served
Statutory release with a section 810 order = full sentence served but offender is released with conditions as they are designated a dangerous offender.
As I mentioned, the latter application - which was applied to Homolka in the summer - is what the Superior Court judge ruled is out of order today.
My question, and the question that I think is on the minds of many Canadians, is this: why shouldn't ALL statutory releasees be subjected to conditions? I think it is an issue that needs to be looked at, as this case points out, within the context of an overall review of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.
Martin would be wise to point this out before Harper does, and in fact, the Government signalled its intention to have such a review in the last Parliament, so he has some ammo here.
Refer to section 810 of the Criminal Code for a more fulsome look at the dangerous offender provisions. Fully legal and codified in law.
Post a Comment
<< Home