 IN CANADA, YOU'VE NEVER REALLY "DONE YOUR TIME"
On Thursday, I mentioned that it was very likely that the murderous (if hot) bitch Karla Homolka would be fucked over by the government of Canada following her release from prison next month. On Friday afternoon, that had come to pass. A Quebec judge has granted a petition by the province of Ontario to limit the freedom of Homolka despite the fact the she has served her sentence in its entirety.
One of the great claims of a democratic society is that all criminals have "a debt to pay to society." Theoretically, once that debt is paid, one is free to get on with life and free of further government restriction. Most right thinking people would agree that this is generally a positive thing.
I should say one thing before I continue. I'm a hard-line believer in law and order. I wish that I could support the death penalty in this country. If Canada had a serious constitution, I would have advocated executing both Karla and her demented husband, Paul Bernardo for their crimes. But Canada does not have a serious constitution and I am opposed to a return of capital punishment in this country.
Barring a death sentence in this case, I would have supported a prison term of 1,000 years each, with no parole until one-third of the sentence - or 333 years - was completed. Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka deserve no less for three murders and a fourth, non-fatal rape. In several US states, both would be facing lethal injection now, no doubt about it. And even the needle seems too quaint to punish their crimes. Crucifixion seems far more just. I wouldn't have shed any tears if either or both were murdered in prison, either.
But Canada doesn't work that way. Canadians enjoy their moral superiority over Americans and tsk-tsking the long sentences given in places like Florida are something of a national past-time here. The harshest sentence Canada can hand down is life without the possibility of parole for 25 years. In fact, that doesn't even mean what it suggests. There is what is known as the "faint hope clause" which allows a prisoner to apply for parole after serving ten years. Most Canadian prisoners end up serving only one-third of their term before being released from prison. Only 5% of Canadian inmates serve their entire sentence. We're very liberal in our criminal justice system.
Not so liberal, however, that the Canadian courts don't have neat little tricks to get around what seem like light sentences. One of those is a "dangerous offender" designation. The designation results in a indeterminate sentence beyond the one for which the offender has already been sentenced. Since the inception of the status in 1977, only one dangerous offender has been released from prison. Essentially, it is a sentence of life without parole yet allows Canada to say that we don't sentence people to life with no parole. Paul Bernardo has been designated a dangerous offender.
Then there are what are called "810 applications", which refer to Section 810 of the Criminal Code of Canada. An 810 order allows the court to place restrictions on an inmate who has already completed his or her entire prison sentence.
The Canadian government's own website describes Section 810 in a proudly Orwellian way.
Section 810 peace bonds are preventative court orders requiring an individual to agree to specific conditions to keep the peace. These instruments are available to police to protect the public before a criminal offence has been committed.
First appearing in the Canadian Criminal Code in 1892, they were a codified version of the common law peace bond available to magistrates to order individuals likely to commit property offences to “keep the peace”. The instrument has evolved to also target individuals who are likely to commit violent or sexual offences (emphasis in original). The law gets even more frightening. In recent years, specialized forms of the section 810 peace bond have been created through amendments to the Criminal Code. In 1993, section 810.1 was added targeting individuals who police fear may commit a sex offence against someone under the age of 14 years. This provision requires the court, where satisfied on reasonable grounds of the fear that the individual will commit a sexual offence against a child, to order the individual to agree to be bound by specific conditions that restrict the person’s movements and behaviour, especially in areas where children are known to be present such as playgrounds and schools.
In 1997, Bill C-55 came into effect significantly toughening the Dangerous Offender provisions of the Criminal Code, as well as creating a new peace bond provision, section 810.2. This peace bond focuses on individuals that appear likely to commit violent or sexual offences.
Both 810.1 and 810.2 are designed to be preventative and not punitive. It is not necessary for an offender to have committed a criminal offence in order for a judge to make an order against the individual (emphasis added.) There you have it. Any Canadian citizen may have his or her rights limited by the government and all the police need to demonstrate is "reasonable grounds to fear that an offence may be committed. The government is very clear to point out that 810 is "preventative and not punitive." This is because if it were punitive, an 810 application would be subject to "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" rather than this ridiculous "reasonable grounds to fear" standard.
Ordinarily, police and/or provincial crown attorneys apply for sections 810.1 and 810.2 of the Criminal Code. If so ordered by the court, the application must be signed by the individual.
In order to grant a section 810, the evidence must be brought in front of a provincial court judge. The court can hear many types of evidence, and can order the offender to be brought before it to respond. Police may also obtain an arrest warrant to ensure attendance That's right; you can be arrested without charge. Presumably, you can also be held for weeks or months until the time of a hearing. Keep in mind that you aren't being charged with anything al all!
So what does an 810 order actually do?
Where granted, the order binds the individual to specific conditions felt reasonable in the circumstances to protect specific individuals or the general public. Such conditions typically include: regular reporting requirements to police or correctional authorities; weapon prohibitions; close monitoring of the individual’s activity and prohibitions against being within a specific distance of any place such as schools. Other potential restrictions, such as electronic monitoring or curfew, are also possible. Once granted, the peace bond is in effect for up to 12 months, and may be renewed by police by application to a court (emphasis added). The police can keep an individual under an 810 order for the rest of his or her natural life without such trivialities of a trial or a presumption of innocence. The province of Ontario has already said that they intend to keep renewing their 810 application against Karla Homolka. If Karla is personally responsible for the deaths of three people and the sexual assault of a fourth - and she has testified under oath twice that she is - why is she being released at all? Why is 810 even an issue for a triple murderer? Frankly, 810 is an issue because the Ontario Provincial Police are stupid. The murders of Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French were incredibly clean. No DNA evidence was found on either body. Only a small trace amount of French's DNA was found in Bernardo's home. Once Bernardo was arrested, the Green Ribbon task force literally tore the home apart. They went so far as to tear out every wall in the house. But they didn't bother to check the ceilings. They should have. In a ceiling pot light were six videotapes of Bernardo raping French, Mahaffy, Karla's fourteen year old sister Tammy and an unnamed fifteen-year-old "Jane Doe." Bernardo told his lawyer, who removed them from the house and did not turn them over to the Crown for a full eighteen months. This posed a serious problem for the prosecution. Without the tapes and the paucity of physical evidence, all they could prove was that Kristen French had been in Bernardo's home at some point. The quickly realized that without Homolka's co-operation, they couldn't convict Bernardo. So they offered her a deal. Karla would plead guilty to two counts of manslaughter and serve two concurrent terms of twelve years in return for her testimony against Bernardo. Once the existence of Bernardo's videotapes was revealed, tapes that showed Homolka as an enthusiastic participant in the rapes, the public was outraged. The plea bargain became known as "the Deal with the Devil" and opposition members of the Ontario legislature demanded that the plea bargain be rescinded. Accordingly, the government began fucking with Karla almost as soon as Bernardo's trial ended. Usually, the Crown does not oppose parole for a co-operating witness. In Karla's case, they did so with unusual vigour. The Ontario Crown Attorney's office and Corrections Canada were determined to ensure that Homolka would serve every second of her prison sentence. As soon as the press learned of a lesbian relationship Homolka was having in prison, they transferred her from a medium security facility in Quebec to maximum security facility in Saskatchewan for "psychiatric evaluation." One month from tomorrow, the government will have no choice but to release Karla Homolka. She will have served every second of her 12 year sentence, which, as I noted; only 5% of Canadian inmates do. So the Ontario government presented the 810 application. When the Quebec judge ruled in Ontario's favour yesterday, he instituted these conditions on Homolka; The restrictions, under Section 810 of the Criminal Code, mean she must maintain good behaviour and not own any weapons.
She must also:
-Report to the nearest police station on the day of her release and tell them where she is living and who her roommates are.
-Notify police of any change of name.
-Report to a police station the first Friday of every month (or arrange another time).
-Give 96 hours notice if she plans to move.
-Give three days notice if she plans to go away for more than a weekend.
-Complete specific information about any travel plans.
-Give police her travel plans if leaving Quebec.
-Have no contact with people with a criminal record.
-Have no contact with her former husband Paul Bernardo.
-Have no contact with former victims Jane Doe or Nicole T.
-Have no contact with the families of victims Kristen French or Leslie Mahaffy.
-Not possess drugs or illicit substances. (Apparently, no one has advised the officials of Canada's shithead justice system that possession of drugs or illicit substances are already, well, illicit.)
-Not be in a job which gives her access to benzodiazepine, opiates or barbiturates.
-Have no job or volunteer position with people under the age of 16.
-Continue therapy and counselling.
-Provide police with a DNA sample. Keep in mind that this is a woman who has served her complete sentence. These are not parole conditions. This is a woman not currently charged with no crime and this is supposed to be her freedom. Absent the penitentiary bars, Karla Homolka will remain every bit the prisoner when she is released from prison that she is now. Karla Homolka will never again be a free woman in Canada as most people understand freedom to mean. And with two convictions for manslaughter under her belt, there are very few countries that she will be able to enter. Essentially, she's trapped for life. And that may be a very short life, given the feelings most Canadians have for Homolka. I would not be at all surprised if a vigilante kills her within the next five years. I object to Section 810 on grounds of principle. It is a way for the government to limit the freedoms of law-abiding citizens without the distracting niceties of things like a trial. It is a totalitarian law that has no place in a democratic society. I would be amazed that Canadians are not outraged by Section 810 of the Criminal Code of Canada if I didn't realize years ago that Canadians are fucking sheep. I object to the application of Section 810 against Karla Homolka because the motives behind it. This is nothing more than a cover-up of government stupidity and laziness back in 1993. The police had no idea that Paul Bernardo was involved in the deaths of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy until Karla Homolka told them he was. Bernardo was being investigated - and initially charged with - a series of rapes he committed in the Scarborough section of Toronto in the mid and late 1980s. Had the cops taken out the ceilings while they removed the walls of the Bernardo house, they would have had the tapes and a deal with Homolka would not have been necessary. Whether they didn't take out the ceilings due to laziness or stupidity is immaterial. But because they didn't, Karla received much less punishment than she deserved. The public was incensed at the police who investigated the case and the government that gave her her deal. The 810 order has nothing at all to do with justice and everything to do with covering up political and law enforcement laziness, cravenness and stupidity. Karla Homoloka was never convicted of a sexual offence, which 810 is designed to address. She was convicted of manslaughter. Let's overlook for a moment that most convicted rapists don't have an 810 order placed on them upon release. 810 orders are rarer still for people who have served their entire sentence regardless of what they are convicted of. While Homolka's crimes were spectacular, they were not unique. What was unique was the response of law enforcement and the provincial government. By the time she released next month, Homolka will have served her total sentence - something few but the most notorious murders do in Canada. As the government has not alleged that she has violated the terms of her plea agreement, one has to assume that she has abided by them. Karla Homolka has spent the last twelve years paying for her sins. Now she'll spend the rest of her life paying for the sins of craven politicians and incompetent police officers. PermalinkLabels: I Fought The Law
|
