Florida woman granted asylum in Canada

[On Guard for Thee]

The topic is not murder....save it for another laughable thread about lenient sentences in Canada.

Getting back to raping children, here is a good example of lenient sentences :

Why are Canada’s courts soft on sexual crimes against children?

...The crimes committed in R v P.M. are best described as horrifying. A father (identified only as “P.M.” to protect the identity of his victim) vaginally and anally raped his thirteen-year old daughter “approximately ten times” over the course of a little more than a year. When his home was searched after a school counsellor learned of the assaults and called the police, police discovered nearly 2,000 images of child pornography on the man’s computer. Included among them were photographs and videos of him raping his daughter. In some of the videos, the victim was heard begging, “Daddy, please stop”. Needless to say, he didn’t.

The man pleaded guilty to sexual assault, incest, sexual interference, making child pornography, possession of child pornography and careless storage of a firearm. He was sentenced to a total of six years imprisonment by Justice Stephen J. Hunter of the Ontario Court of Justice – five years for the rapes and one additional year for the child pornography convictions (a six-month sentence for the weapons offence was ordered to be served concurrently).

...Of course, in the case of P.M., to talk of a sentence of incarceration for “six years” is itself to promulgate a fiction: because of an institutional orientation in favour of ensuring that convicted criminals spend as little time as possible actually incarcerated, a sentence of “six years imprisonment” will mean nothing close to six actual years spent in prison.

http://c2cjournal.ca/2013/03/why-are-canada%E2%80%99s-courts-soft-on-sexual-crimes-against-children/

And you are attempting to compare this issue with two consenting people, who in Canada are considered adults having sex? Nice try!

[cybercoma]

The topic is not murder....save it for another laughable thread about lenient sentences in Canada.

Getting back to raping children, here is a good example of lenient sentences :

Why are Canada’s courts soft on sexual crimes against children?

...The crimes committed in R v P.M. are best described as horrifying. A father (identified only as “P.M.” to protect the identity of his victim) vaginally and anally raped his thirteen-year old daughter “approximately ten times” over the course of a little more than a year. When his home was searched after a school counsellor learned of the assaults and called the police, police discovered nearly 2,000 images of child pornography on the man’s computer. Included among them were photographs and videos of him raping his daughter. In some of the videos, the victim was heard begging, “Daddy, please stop”. Needless to say, he didn’t.

The man pleaded guilty to sexual assault, incest, sexual interference, making child pornography, possession of child pornography and careless storage of a firearm. He was sentenced to a total of six years imprisonment by Justice Stephen J. Hunter of the Ontario Court of Justice – five years for the rapes and one additional year for the child pornography convictions (a six-month sentence for the weapons offence was ordered to be served concurrently).

...Of course, in the case of P.M., to talk of a sentence of incarceration for “six years” is itself to promulgate a fiction: because of an institutional orientation in favour of ensuring that convicted criminals spend as little time as possible actually incarcerated, a sentence of “six years imprisonment” will mean nothing close to six actual years spent in prison.

http://c2cjournal.ca/2013/03/why-are-canada’s-courts-soft-on-sexual-crimes-against-children/

What exactly does sexual assault. incest, making child pornography, and anally raping a 13 year-old have in common with a consensual relationship with a 16 year old? The answer is absolutely nothing. Do you think Canada would have granted this woman asylum if that was what she was being sentenced for?

[bush_cheney2004]

Convicted child rapist and sex offender jumped bail and is now considered to be an "absconded" felon (fugitive). Not only did she flee Florida, but she left the country entirely to seek asylum in another country. She refused to admit guilt, was not remorseful, and actually received the minimum sentence based on jury findings for all counts and the associated points. One year must be served for each point above 44 according to Florida law.

Edited May 18, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

What exactly does sexual assault. incest, making child pornography, and anally raping a 13 year-old have in common with a consensual relationship with a 16 year old? The answer is absolutely nothing. Do you think Canada would have granted this woman asylum if that was what she was being sentenced for?

Yes....I do. Hug-a-rapist rules apply. Sex offender fugitives are welcomed with open arms.

[bush_cheney2004]

Wow....this story should be made into a movie. Shoot it in Vancouver to save some money ! Here's more on sentencing details, which follow state law:

The sentence is based on a scoring system, set up by the state legislature, and Pegg said Vaughn gave her the minimum sentence for her conviction on five counts of unlawful sex with a teenager.

Prior to trial, Harvey refused a plea offer of 15 years in jail, court officials said.

She "never admitted any wrongdoing, nor acknowledged any liability for her actions," Pegg wrote.

During the trial she didn't take the stand in her own self defense. Her husband, Charles Harvey, told jurors his wife's 16-year-old accuser made up stories about his wife and didn't back down.

"That is the reason we are going down this path," he said then.

But jurors heard a crime laboratory found Denise Harvey's DNA on a condom found in the home of the youth's father.

[Peter F]

Fla has consecutive sentencing; 5 counts x 6 years. Consecutive sentencing has not been found to be in violation of law standards.

So you all are arguing that if he was 15 yr 11 mo, fry her, but he was 16 yr 1 mo......so all's good?

You may think her sentence is over the top, but she had a due process in her state to follow to review. She could've appealed on violation of her 8th Amendment right. There was no talk of when she'd be eligible for parole.....I doubt very much she would've served 30 yrs. Or are you all thinking she shouldn't be on the sex offender list?

I can't believe I am on the same side of an issue as BC; defending US autonomy. A polar vortex must be over hell right now.

]

The USofA can be, is, and always shall be, as autonomous as it wants. Who's stopping them? Nobody.

The State of Florida has not and cannot decree what the law shall be anywhere else

but Florida. Thus all the Cuban refugees.

Canada decrees its own laws also; one of them being that this government shall not send persons to places where they would undergo cruel and unusual punishment without certain guarantees from that government.

[bush_cheney2004]

The U.S. can still seek extradition of Mrs. Hot Pants back to Florida. Cut a deal, she does some serious time, and will be too old to prey on underage children once she gets out.

Does anyone know if the provinces have a registered sex offender and tracking program ?

Edited May 18, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[On Guard for Thee]

The U.S. can still seek extradition of Mrs. Hot Pants back to Florida. Cut a deal, she does some serious time, and will be too old to prey on underage children once she gets out.

Does anyone know if the provinces have a registered sex offender and tracking program ?

Of course they do. You don't seem to get one fairly important point here, in Canada she is not a sex offender, and since the penalty has been deemed "cruel and unusual" I doubt she will be extradited.

[bush_cheney2004]

Of course they do. You don't seem to get one fairly important point here, in Canada she is not a sex offender, and since the penalty has been deemed "cruel and unusual" I doubt she will be extradited.

That remains to be seen. Marc Emery thought he wasn't going to do any time either because he was "special".

[On Guard for Thee]

That remains to be seen. Marc Emery thought he wasn't going to do any time either because he was "special".

Once again you try mixing apples and oranges. Emery clearly committed a crime and plead guilty to it.

[Wilber]

Not relevant and probably not admissible in court anyway, just like rape shield laws for female victims. But I expected such a double standard because the victim is male in this case.

I have no problem with convicted sex offenders being sentenced to consecutive vacations in prison for multiple counts of raping children. I would be more concerned if I was stuck hugging murderers and sex offenders a la Canadian style instead.

By double standard would you mean someone like Jerry Lee Lewis who legally married a 14 year old, then dumped her to legally marry his 13 year old cousin?

Nothin like consistency in your outrage.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Wilber

[Bob Macadoo]

The USofA can be, is, and always shall be, as autonomous as it wants. Who's stopping them? Nobody.

The State of Florida has not and cannot decree what the law shall be anywhere else

but Florida. Thus all the Cuban refugees.

Canada decrees its own laws also; one of them being that this government shall not send persons to places where they would undergo cruel and unusual punishment without certain guarantees from that government.

Here is what is actually required;

3.1.8. Risk Not Inherent or Incidental to Lawful Sanctions

A claimant is not a person in need of protection if the risk faced is inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions. The lawful sanctions, however, cannot be imposed in disregard of accepted international standards. This will require RPDand RAD members to engage in an analysis of lawful punishments which may nonetheless offend international norms, having regard to s. 3(3)(f) which directs that the Act be construed and applied in a manner that complies with international human rights instruments to which Canada is a signatory.

Again consecutive sentencing is not adverse to international law......it may hurt your sensibilities, but that doesn't make it asylum worthy.

[Peter F]

Here is what is actually required;

Again consecutive sentencing is not adverse to international law......it may hurt your sensibilities, but that doesn't make it asylum worthy.

But it did make it asylum worthy - proven by the fact she recieved asylum.

[Wilber]

We're not doing that. We're telling Florida that putting someone away for 30 years for having consensual sex with a 16 year old is excessive punishment. It's literally a person's entire life behind bars. Think about how old you will be 30 years from now.

The way I read it, the fact it was not a crime in Canada was mentioned in the ruling. I don't think that should be relevant. I agree the sentence is excessive.

[bush_cheney2004]

By double standard would you mean someone like Jerry Lee Lewis who legally married a 14 year old, then dumped her to legally marry his 13 year old cousin?

Nothin like consistency in your outrage.

The issue here is the law as legislated by Florida, not a historical trip for the age of consent that has changed in Canada and many other jurisdictions. Does that mean Canadian Law had it wrong for all those years too? Where was the "outrage" ?

[Wilber]

The issue here is the law as legislated by Florida, not a historical trip for the age of consent that has changed in Canada and many other jurisdictions. Does that mean Canadian Law had it wrong for all those years too? Where was the "outrage" ?

It's not about the age of consent, it's about the 3rd world penalties Florida applies.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's not about the age of consent, it's about the 3rd world penalties Florida applies.

Five counts will do that...just ask Bernie Madoff. Spare me from the "3rd world" comparisons as long as Canada has serious problems of its own (e.g. treatment of "aboriginal" women).

[Argus]

The U.S. can still seek extradition of Mrs. Hot Pants back to Florida. Cut a deal, she does some serious time, and will be too old to prey on underage children once she gets out.

Does anyone know if the provinces have a registered sex offender and tracking program ?

There isn't a hope in hell a refugee will be extradited to the country which she's been accepted as a refugee from.

[Argus]

The issue here is the law as legislated by Florida, not a historical trip for the age of consent that has changed in Canada and many other jurisdictions. Does that mean Canadian Law had it wrong for all those years too? Where was the "outrage" ?

We didn't put people in prison for 30 years over it.

[Argus]

Here is what is actually required;

Again consecutive sentencing is not adverse to international law......it may hurt your sensibilities, but that doesn't make it asylum worthy.

Since she's been given asylum, I would suggest they disagree.

And I don't think 30 years in prison for sex with a 16 year old represents international norms, unless they're set by Iran.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Argus

[bush_cheney2004]

We didn't put people in prison for 30 years over it.

You can murder people in broad daylight and not get anywhere near 30 years in Canada...so what ?

[bush_cheney2004]

There isn't a hope in hell a refugee will be extradited to the country which she's been accepted as a refugee from.

She will remain a fugitive under US law....maybe some bounty hunter will bring Mrs. Hot Pants in for a fine reward, Old West style.

[Argus]

I said consecutive sentencing as a judicial statute wasn't in violation of western standards. That's a far cry from 30 yrs not being "appealable" under 8th amendment grounds.

I never said I agreed with the sentence, I'm simply saying she is an american citizen who is subject to her country's due process. There is nothing going on in my opinion that warrants asylum.

I've seen a lot of cases of outrageously long time given for non-violent offenses in the US, and very rarely does anyone sane step in and say they ought to cut the criminal some slack. The US is the prison capital of the world for a reason, and it's that vindictive, puritan attitude of theirs which shows no mercy to people who break the law - well, unless they're corporations of course. 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prison population.

[Argus]

You can murder people in broad daylight and not get anywhere near 30 years in Canada...so what ?

You can do the same in the US. Happens all the time.

[Argus]

She will remain a fugitive under US law....maybe some bounty hunter will bring Mrs. Hot Pants in for a fine reward, Old West style.

The last one who did that got extradited back here for trial and sentencing for kidnapping. :-P