Robert Latimer denied day parole

[capricorn]

I was referring to my own feellings, not Mr. Latimer's. I can't possibly place myself in his shoes.

Yes, agreed the game's the thing. The fact remains the Parole Board looks after the Parole Board first and foremost.

[Wilber]

Yes, agreed the game's the thing. The fact remains the Parole Board looks after the Parole Board first and foremost.

That is obvious but it is not their job to look after themselves.

[Guest American Woman]

I've read so much in this thread that I agree with. So many thoughts and emotions. I feel strongly that Latimer should be free. I'm wondering if anyone knows of any active campaign on his behalf; if there's anywhere/anyone we could write to to petition on his behalf. Would this even make a difference? Anyone have any answers/ideas?

[Riverwind]

I've read so much in this thread that I agree with. So many thoughts and emotions. I feel strongly that Latimer should be free. I'm wondering if anyone knows of any active campaign on his behalf; if there's anywhere/anyone we could write to to petition on his behalf. Would this even make a difference? Anyone have any answers/ideas?

The Prime Minister has the power to grant a pardon, however, the chances of that happening are next to zero since disabled rights activists would howl.

[Wilber]

The Prime Minister has the power to grant a pardon, however, the chances of that happening are next to zero since disabled rights activists would howl.

I think he should be out of jail and on full parole, I'm not really comfortable with a pardon as it could send a wrong message. The system should be showing some understanding and compassion but it should not be justifying his actions.

[Fortunata]

The Prime Minister has the power to grant a pardon, however, the chances of that happening are next to zero since disabled rights activists would howl.

Along with the disable rights activists I think would be Harper's base supporters since they believe in tough on crime, life is life, etc. It would not go with this government's philosophy on crime and punishment, imo.

Edited December 7, 2007 by Fortunata

[Guest American Woman]

The Prime Minister has the power to grant a pardon, however, the chances of that happening are next to zero since disabled rights activists would howl.

I'm guessing the chances of Harper doing it would be next to zero. He's too Bush-like in his thoughts/actions. Maybe somewhere down the line he'll get his freedom. Hopefully, anyway.

[Riverwind]

I think he should be out of jail and on full parole, I'm not really comfortable with a pardon as it could send a wrong message. The system should be showing some understanding and compassion but it should not be justifying his actions.

Pardon is a legal concept that recognizes a person’s official rehabilitation after they were convicted of a crime. It does not imply that they should have never been convicted for committing a crime in a strictly legal sense. However, I am not sure how pardons apply to murder cases and I agree that the public understanding of the word would lead people to believe he had been declared innocent.

[Guest American Woman]

Does anyone know how much influence the Canadian Civil Liberties Association has? They say Robert Latimer's continued imprisonment is nothing short of a “national disgrace.”

[Rue]

Was he wrong?

Tracy was a 40-pound quadriplegic, a 12-year-old who functioned at the level of a three-month-old. She had been repeatedly operated on and at the time of her murder was due for more surgery, this time to remove a thigh bone. She could not walk, talk or feed herself, though she responded to affection and occasionally smiled. Tracy was in constant, excruciating pain yet, for reasons not entirely clear, could not be treated with a pain-killer stronger than Tylenol. Link

"Constant, excruciating pain." How is that supposed to be a life worth living? How could anyone bear to see their child suffer such a fate?

Well American this is an outrageous case and I will tell you why. His daughter was a classic case of someone who medicine could not help. Her continued life necessarily meant she would be condemned to excruciating and overwhelming pain that could not be controlled by medication.

This was never an issue to her father/mother of her being disabled and them not wanting to look after her. That is what it was turned into by disability groups who projected their own fears into the equation and saw themselves in this girl. The disabled groups felt this girl symbolized them and how easy it could be to dispose of them and they took over and intervened in the case and turned it into a political platform for another issue-the issue as to how to accommodate the disabled.

That is NOT what this case was. when Mr. Latimer put his daughter to death he did not in my opinion have the mens reas required of a criminal intending to kill.

This was not a murder. This was not somebody saying I will kill as Capricorn defined it. There has to be a clear distinction between criminal intent, i.e., a deliberate intent to kill and someone who genuinely was placed in a situation where as a parent his moral duty to assure his daughter would not suffer was paramount.

Every doctor Mr. Latimer went to said there was nothing they could do to prevent her pain. The medical system could not help her and for people to think it is acceptable to leave people condemned to excruciating pain particularly someone who would not understand what was happening is inexcusable.

Its a classic case of many in our society fearing death and in so doing compromising the quality of life. Because so many of us fear death we are willing to prolong the agony of this poor innocent child.

What I said to disabled groups in heated debates was they were projecting their own fears and anxieties into a situation that was beteen this poor girl, her parents and the treating physicians.

This case should have never gone to trial. If the disability groups were genuinely interested in promoting a system that promotes humanity and caring they would have said, fine convict him but don't put him in jail.

This man did not belong in jail and never has. By imprisoning him they punished his wife as well.

He was no danger to society.

Now let us deal with this bull shit Parole Board. They have options. Testing him for remorse is NOT the only option and in fact in the majority of these hearings, remorse is not even a factor.

In criminal courts, remorse as a mitigating factor is considered a suspect and often idiotic way to determine guilt as its so easy to manipulate by sociopaths, psychopaths and those who have done wrong. In fact the first thing a dishonest person does is show remorse.

Now think how absurd it was in this case. How can you ask the father of a girl who has been told his daughter must live the rest of her life screaming out in pain-whether he regrets what he did? What kind of idiot asks such a question? What kind of idiot society asks a man if he regrets allowing his daughter to find peace and comfort instead of a life of hell and pain?

So what-the man now stays in jail but Karla Hamolka she's out reproducing. Makes sense to me. Better still just how many murderers and rapists get off with far less time then he's served because what-they showed remorse? what sanctimonious bullshit.

Here are the cold hard facts. Advances in medicine keep people alive but many will be placed in a state of excrutiating pain or compromised life. Yes I am the first to appreciate the vulerabiluty of the disabled and how they feel if you allow euthenasia it will make it easier to kill them, but that was NOT and should not be the issue.

Holland has shown you can build in safeguards to assure no disabled person can be done away with because someone finds it inconvenient. That has to be distinguished and not linked as disabled groups are doing and which I think is dead wrong, with the issue of a dying patient or chronically ill patient racked in pain who can not be helped.

I had a friend die of a very fast spreading cancer. The system worked for him. They allowed him to die at home with a morphine drip he controlled at all times. He died peacefully in his sleep thanks to his being able to have control of the morphine drip. In his remaining days he at least had a way to control the pain and find some dignity and comfort.

What about this poor girl? How dare anyone question her father and demand his remorse. Remorse for what, for not watching her scream out in a tormented state as her bones fused together?

I am disgusted with the lack of compassion in our criminal system and in its absoltuely f..cked up priorities in how it values life.

The whole point of Dr. Kavorkian's deliberate provocation of the legal system was to get people to wake up and deal with this issue. As we all age, many of us will be faced with terminal illness. Do you really think you need someone lecturing you that you must stay alive when you are in pain?

In this case the people who judge Latimer do not know the facts. They do not know he was told there was no hope for his daughter and he tried and tried for years. To Judge this man and demand he apologize is bullshit. He has been made a scapegoat for our society's inability to express compassion and deal with its fear of death and the shortcomings of our medical health systems.

I would have done the exact same thing if it was my daughter. This man has been tortured enough. Does any rational person believe he should be punished for what e did? Do people not realize he has to live the rest of his life realizing what he did?

The same people saying Latimer should stay in jail, willl soon enough find themselves in hospitals riddled in pain and demanding mercy. What goes around will come around and they better hope the same justice applied to Latimer doesn't trap them in a hell of their own painful making.

[Rue]

Does anyone know how much influence the Canadian Civil Liberties Association has? They say Robert Latimer's continued imprisonment is nothing short of a “national disgrace.”

Very little. In fact the only people who would have influence are the Law Societies and Medical Ethics Professors and prominent lawyers, religious figures and health care professionals who should be outraged and volunteering to testify for him at such hearings.

For the Parole Board to rely on the remorse test is pure political grand-standing. Its outrageous but what is more outrageous is the silence from the legal bars across Canada and the idiot politicians in his own province.

[Rue]

Pardon is a legal concept that recognizes a person’s official rehabilitation after they were convicted of a crime. It does not imply that they should have never been convicted for committing a crime in a strictly legal sense. However, I am not sure how pardons apply to murder cases and I agree that the public understanding of the word would lead people to believe he had been declared innocent.

In Canada "pardoning" someone really only means removing their name from the criminal record so when they go apply for a job or a passport or a driver's license or a job its not there.

In this case, the Parole Board had many options and using the remorse test didn't even have to be used.

The major test of such a person is to ask, will they or are they likely to cause harm if released back into society and how much rehabilitation would they need if they were to re-enter society.

That was never asked because the Parole Board deliberately precluded such questions by saying since he shows no remorse, we don't have to ask anything else.

The Parole Board engaged in pure and utter politics. Someone directed them to use the remorse test deliberately knowing in this case this man would not lie. Its nasty politics at its worst by some religious fundamentalists who firmly believe in what they are doing and that only God can end life. They were present through-out the trial and I suspect have strong clout in the province where Mr. Latimer was unfortunate enough to live. I can assure you had this been Quebec, Ontario or British Columbia he would have been placed on probation if it ever went to trial.

Ineresting how blow hards like Clayton Ruby and Eddie Greenspan have no time of day for this man. Mr. Ruby was of course concerned about discrimination against pit bulls but this man-bah.

[Rue]

Pardon is a legal concept that recognizes a person’s official rehabilitation after they were convicted of a crime. It does not imply that they should have never been convicted for committing a crime in a strictly legal sense. However, I am not sure how pardons apply to murder cases and I agree that the public understanding of the word would lead people to believe he had been declared innocent.

To clarify, the PM has no ability to pardon this man. He can't circumvent the parole process. People are mixing up the legal powers of our Prime Minister with a United States governor. Once someone is convicted of a crime, the Prime Minister can not interfere. In fact once any legal process commences or a politice investigation commences, no politician in Canada has the right to interfere. That would actually be a criminal offense not to mention grounds to impeach them from office.

[Riverwind]

To clarify, the PM has no ability to pardon this man. He can't circumvent the parole process. People are mixing up the legal powers of our Prime Minister with a United States governor. Once someone is convicted of a crime, the Prime Minister can not interfere. In fact once any legal process commences or a politice investigation commences, no politician in Canada has the right to interfere. That would actually be a criminal offense not to mention grounds to impeach them from office.

I stand corrected. I heard some pundit suggest it was possible....

[Wilber]

Another example of how our system is concerned about kids. But that Lattimer guy is a real threat.

Link

[Guest American Woman]

After doing some research, it looks as if this would be the person to contact regarding Latimer:

The Honourable Robert Douglas Nicholson

Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

284 Wellington Street

Ottawa, Ontario

Canada K1A 0H8

Rue, just want to say that you've made very good points. I agree with all that you said.

Edited to add:

I've written my letter, and hope others will do the same.

Edited December 7, 2007 by American Woman

[Wilber]

I think Latimer is very aware of the game he should play with the parole board. Could it be he is merely going through the parole process mechanically but deep down wants to be punished for his actions. Perhaps he feels guiltier than he lets on.

Then why would he even apply for parole? He doesn't have to.

Edited December 7, 2007 by Wilber

[capricorn]

Then why would he even apply for parole? He doesn't have to.

Maybe it is his family insisting and he wants to please them, who knows.

[fellowtraveller]

Karla Homolka walks free, and Rober tLatimer does not.

Some justice system we have here.

[Wilber]

Maybe it is his family insisting and he wants to please them, who knows.

A stretch methinks.

[capricorn]

A stretch methinks.

Wilber, you can't blame me for trying.

[guyser]

Karla Homolka walks free, and Rober tLatimer does not.

Some justice system we have here.

One cannot compare those by any stretch.

The first is a classic screw up by police, the other a dad tormented by his own daughters pain and suffering.

[capricorn]

One cannot compare those by any stretch.

The first is a classic screw up by police, the other a dad tormented by his own daughters pain and suffering.

The two cases are miles apart though both cases cry out for changes to criminal code and the justice system changes.

Off topic on Homolka, in addition to police and prosecutor foul ups apparently Homolka's lawyers withheld video tapes that would have sealed Homolka's fate as a willing accomplice to multiple murders.

[guyser]

Off topic on Homolka, in addition to police and prosecutor foul ups apparently Homolka's lawyers withheld video tapes that would have sealed Homolka's fate as a willing accomplice to multiple murders.

He did eventually end up with them , but it was the police who occupied the house for thirty days and could not find them. The police turned the house upside down, but forgot to look n the ceiling.

[capricorn]

The police turned the house upside down, but forgot to look n the ceiling.

Fools! When I felt my teenage sons had something to hide from me, the first place I looked was in the false ceiling in their bedroom. Perhaps the cops should assign searches to lawyers or parents.