Karla Homolka

[luohan]

I registered just so that I post in this thread. I'm doing this topic for a debate at school and was assigned: [For] Homolka's release upon serving her sentence. As I was doing my research, I actually began to realise that this issue is way out of proportion. Here's what I think.

This issue definitely comes down to fundamental human rights. A convict has rights as determined by the law, and as much as we fear that she will commit another crime, we cannot as a people decide her fate without changing our laws. The ruling of the court is final and as much as we would like to believe that she withheld evidence, it was her lawyer and not her who was found guilty of doing so.

She isn't a psychopath, so she is less likely to repeat her offense. Whether she shows any remorse is subjective and should not be taken into account (considering that many juries have been swayed by tearful and emotional witness statements when they should have stayed objective and only looked at the facts). The true fact is that only Homolka truly knows if she is sorry for her crimes. The public should be notified of her release. However, people (mothers of teenagers to be precise) want to crucify her rights in order to satisfy their fears, paranoia, and hatred. There is a reason why Homolka fears that she will be lynched upon her release, thats because of all the antagonism surrounding her. I feel that there is no need for people to become proactive in this issue (which has been blown out of proportion). Face it, worse crimes are being commited legitimately, if you want to look at it moraly or ethically. If you don't want to look at it ethically, then you don't have much of an argument (if you believe that she should be charged for other crimes).

She served her sentence and that should be that. To those who don't believe that the Canadian justice system is in fact "just". Then why don't you go and change the entire criminal code to be more strict (assuming thats what you want) rather than taking out your anger on one person who has taken advantage of our loose justice system?

Everyone also deserves a second chance in my opinion. To summarise that, I guess that I'm not an "Eye for Eye" person. Instead, I look at one of my favourite acronyms, which is W.W.J.D.

Peace!

[luohan]

To add more, the video tapes never showed the death of any of the people in question, on the rape. Therefore, the tapes only implicate her for rape and not for murder.

Also, the prosecutors could have chosen to charge her with more crimes even after the sentence (an 8 month period). It was the prosecutors who chose not to persue this.

I can now say for sure that she cannot for certain be branded a sociopath nor a psychopath. No psychologist has ever made a direct diagnosis (instead, everything was from documents and records rather than any direct contanct).

Finally, I would advise everyone to just leave her alone (YES I'm defending her). This mob mentality needs to stop and we need to accept that she served the sentence that was given to her, and that ruling was final.

[luohan]

I think I hit refresh or something, my bad.

[luohan]

Tweal, if you like maybe we can arrage for Karla to move in next door to you. You'll probably be safe, but the young girls in your neighbourhood not be quite so fortunate, especially if she hooks up with another guy who likes what she likes, torturing, raping and killing young girls.

From my perspective, I am not comfortable at all with releasing violent sexual predator onto an unsuspecting society.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

She has been all over the news, and in addition to that, she has been the hot topic in many forums. Do you really think that we are an unsuspecting society?

[mona]

Excellent Points made. I don't think that women are sweet and kinder and gentler. on the contrary, sometime we can be worse then men! Homolka should be locked up for life. i respect Canada's judicial system but we should give longer sentences to murderers who kill in cold blood (i understand if murder is committed in self defense) that is the only hting i like about hte American system. If you kill people you get a heavy sentence (well at least for serial killers) Homolka need to be kept out of the public.

[Melanie_]

However, people (mothers of teenagers to be precise) want to crucify her rights in order to satisfy their fears, paranoia, and hatred. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'll assume this was directed at me, and I agree with you, to a point. Fear and paranoia (I won't go as far as to say hatred) are a big part of the backlash that she should expect upon release. Her "rights" are the last thing that I want to hold up as the most important part of this debate. She willingly participated in the kidnapping, torture, rape and murder of three young girls, one of them her sister. Did she give any thought to their "rights"? Her sentence was a mockery of the justice system, and completely devalued the lives of three girls who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. I understand what you are saying, that she was given a sentence and has served it; however, it is too much to expect the Canadian public to just forgive and forget.

[luohan]

I'll assume this was directed at me, and I agree with you, to a point. Fear and paranoia (I won't go as far as to say hatred) are a big part of the backlash that she should expect upon release. Her "rights" are the last thing that I want to hold up as the most important part of this debate. She willingly participated in the kidnapping, torture, rape and murder of three young girls, one of them her sister. Did she give any thought to their "rights"?  Her sentence was a mockery of the justice system, and completely devalued the lives of three girls who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. I understand what you are saying, that she was given a sentence and has served it; however, it is too much to expect the Canadian public to just forgive and forget.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I understand this, however everyone needs to be equal under the law regardless of what they did. As long as she is a human being (some can argue that she isn't), then she should undergo the legal process with neither passion nor prejudice from the government, the same way that everyone is. Taking someone's rights away because they violated another person's rights is understandable. However, she has repaid society under the law and it should be left at that. I'm 16 years old and I seriously wouldn't care if she moved in next door to me. I amend what i said earlier, I am not defending her. I am being very impartial about this, I just don't want to see one person being despised so much regardless of what that person did.

[luohan]

I have no forgiveness, no desire to see her rehabilitated, no sympathy for her to get a chance to lead a "normal" life. She blew any chance she ever deserved.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another thing, you said that you have no forgiveness. I would guess that she didn't do anything that directly affects you or anyone close to you, so there would be nothing that you could forgive her for, wouldn't you agree?

[luohan]

Well, if deterrence is the goal, it doesn't work. There doesn't seem to be any correlation between harsh punishments (even death) and decreasing crime rates. So its mostly about changing those who can be changed and punishing those who canot. I'm perfectly willing to admit there are some people (Clifford Olson, Cliffors Sleigh, Bernardo) who I don't think can be rehabilitated and who pose a danger to society. But for anyone to take these extreme examples and hold them up as evidence of the need for harsher prison sentences is specious reasoning.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With the right treatment, and with some time, you can make someone believe that 2+2=5 (thats was from 1984 ). I guess I'm trying to say that anyone can be rehabilitated, you just need to "re-wire" his mind which is easy enough if you know how to.

Feel free to tell me if I'm getting anoying.

[Argus]

I have no forgiveness, no desire to see her rehabilitated, no sympathy for her to get a chance to lead a "normal" life. She blew any chance she ever deserved.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another thing, you said that you have no forgiveness. I would guess that she didn't do anything that directly affects you or anyone close to you, so there would be nothing that you could forgive her for, wouldn't you agree?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Some of us have cares and concerns which go above and beyond our own personal lives and what affects us. Would you forgive Adolph Hitler? Pol Pot? Joseph Stalin? When people commit crimes so grossly offensive to the world and society at large there is nothing at all unusual about members of that society feeling anger towards them.

[Argus]

Well, if deterrence is the goal, it doesn't work. There doesn't seem to be any correlation between harsh punishments (even death) and decreasing crime rates. So its mostly about changing those who can be changed and punishing those who canot. I'm perfectly willing to admit there are some people (Clifford Olson, Cliffors Sleigh, Bernardo) who I don't think can be rehabilitated and who pose a danger to society. But for anyone to take these extreme examples and hold them up as evidence of the need for harsher prison sentences is specious reasoning.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With the right treatment, and with some time, you can make someone believe that 2+2=5 (thats was from 1984 ). I guess I'm trying to say that anyone can be rehabilitated, you just need to "re-wire" his mind which is easy enough if you know how to

I would doubt you can rehabilitate everyone. Who we are is a product of all our life experiences and our interpretions of them. You don't change that with a long chat or electroshock therapy. And some people are simply sociopaths. You can't teach a sociopath to care about anyone but himself, no matter how hard you try.

[Argus]

This issue definitely comes down to fundamental human rights.

I don't think there is any more basic human right than the right to life - and that is a right Karla took from others, including her own sister. Society has the right to defend itself against dangerous people, and it's unfortunate that in this case the people charged with doing that failed to do their jobs properly.

A convict has rights as determined by the law, and as much as we fear that she will commit another crime, we cannot as a people decide her fate without changing our laws.

I'm okay with changing our laws.

She isn't a psychopath, so she is less likely to repeat her offense.

What makes you think you have to be a psychopath in order to have a high chance of repeating your offense? There are uncountable career criminals who repeat their offence on a regular basis and are not psychopaths.

From all I've seen Homolka is, if not a sociopath, then very close to it. This is a woman who drugged, raped and ultimately murdered her own baby sister, after all, to please her husband. And despite that horrific ending to their happy little rape (no one is suggesting they intended to kill Tammy) she participated in further drug induced rapes of teenage girls, and was shown, on video, enjoying herself thoroughly in the process. This is not a woman who has any conscience, or any care for those she might harm or kill.

Most likely Homolka is not dangerous alone. But she seems to go for men who exacerbate her sociopathic/sexual sadistic tendencies. She also, in the case of Bernardo, prodded his own sexual sadism to a higher level. He had raped many women and girls before Homolka joined him. But never tried to kill any of them.

It's worth noting that Homolka's boyfriend now is another murderer (his previous girlfriend), another man who should have been locked away forever, but will be ready for parole in another few years. The thought of the two of them together, one feeding on the other, is enough for society to take action to defend itself.

Whether she shows any remorse is subjective and should not be taken into account

If you get right down to it all life is subjective. However, we can judge Homolka's likelihood of remorse based on her actions since the crimes, and logically infer there is no remorse. How sorry was she for her sister's untimely death at just 14? Not very, or she wouldn't have risked the life of another teenage girl not long after by feeding her the same drugs so she and Bernardo could rape her. How sorry was she for the death of Leslie Mahaffey? Not very, for she was seen having a great time during the rapes of Kristin French not that long after.

And now she's having a long distance love affair with another sly, brutal murderer.

Remorse? No, I think not.

She served her sentence and that should be that. To those who don't believe that the Canadian justice system is in fact "just". Then why don't you go and change the entire criminal code to be more strict (assuming thats what you want) rather than taking out your anger on one person who has taken advantage of our loose justice system?

I can do both.

Everyone also deserves a second chance in my opinion.

Does Hitler deserve a second chance? What about Bernardo? Should he be let out again for a second chance? No, everyone does NOT deserve a second chance. Some crimes are unforgiveable. Homolka should have been hanged, not given a light sentence by incompetent, politically motivated Crowns.

[Melanie_]

Luohan, you are far from annoying. I think you have the idealism of a 16 year old, which is exactly what you should have at your age. Its also what Tammy Homolka, Leslie Mahaffy and Kristin French should have had the chance to experience.

For the most part, I am a rational, left leaning (yes, I know, some of you will claim that is a contradiction) supporter of human rights. But, IMO, Karla Homolka doesn't deserve a second chance - those girls aren't getting a second chance, because of the choices Karla Homolka made. You won't hear this often, but I agree with Argus - his points are my thoughts exactly.

[luohan]

I have no forgiveness, no desire to see her rehabilitated, no sympathy for her to get a chance to lead a "normal" life. She blew any chance she ever deserved.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another thing, you said that you have no forgiveness. I would guess that she didn't do anything that directly affects you or anyone close to you, so there would be nothing that you could forgive her for, wouldn't you agree?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Some of us have cares and concerns which go above and beyond our own personal lives and what affects us. Would you forgive Adolph Hitler? Pol Pot? Joseph Stalin? When people commit crimes so grossly offensive to the world and society at large there is nothing at all unusual about members of that society feeling anger towards them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can honestly say that I have nothing to forgive Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot for. Though they commited crimes on a uninmaginable scale, it did not affect me. I was not born at the time and I doubt any of you were. I can't forgive them for anything. Forgiveness is between them and god.

[luohan]

I would doubt you can rehabilitate everyone. Who we are is a product of all our life experiences and our interpretions of them. You don't change that with a long chat or electroshock therapy. And some people are simply sociopaths. You can't teach a sociopath to care about anyone but himself, no matter how hard you try.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quite the contrary my friend! Yes, I agree that we are the products of our experiences (which we recolect through our memory), but who said that we can't alter someone's memory? This is a whole different ethics issue, but it can "brainwash" just about anyone. Deprive them of water and light for 50 hours, and the average human will accept any programming.

[Argus]

I would doubt you can rehabilitate everyone. Who we are is a product of all our life experiences and our interpretions of them. You don't change that with a long chat or electroshock therapy. And some people are simply sociopaths. You can't teach a sociopath to care about anyone but himself, no matter how hard you try.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quite the contrary my friend! Yes, I agree that we are the products of our experiences (which we recolect through our memory), but who said that we can't alter someone's memory? This is a whole different ethics issue, but it can "brainwash" just about anyone. Deprive them of water and light for 50 hours, and the average human will accept any programming.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Life is not nearly that simple. There were all kinds of stories about the North Koreans, Chinese and Vietnamese brutalizing American and allied prisoners in the Korean and Vietnam war, and trying to brainwash them. To my knowledge there were no successes.

But that really is beside the point. No one is going to allow the state to inflict torture on Homolka, so brainwashing is not an option.

[luohan]

Well, I must say that I'm Stumped.

[luohan]

She is being released today, any final thoughts?