Pedophile's Sentence too Harsh, Judge Rules

[I miss Reagan]

Every so often I question my allegiance to the right a bit when I think about how I feel about certain issues and when I get turned off from some of the radicals we have on our side. But it never fails that shortly after some of these doubts start creeping into my mind the liberal left always manages to remind me why I want nothing to do with their way of thinking.

Can one of you leftists explain to me the kind of liberal Canadian thinking that would justify reducing a 15 year sentence, to a cushy Canadian prison, for raping a baby for two years!?

A Quebec judge on Tuesday reduced the sentence of a Montreal man who raped his infant daughter, saying the original ruling was too harsh.

The 32 year old was found guilty in March 2005 of sexual assault and using his daughter to possess, produce and distribute child pornography. The assaults started when his daughter was 24 months old and lasted for two years. Story.

I'll take our evangelicals any day over your sick bleeding hearts.

[theloniusfleabag]

IMR,

Good to see you back.

Can one of you leftists explain to me the kind of liberal Canadian thinking that would justify reducing a 15 year sentence, to a cushy Canadian prison, for raping a baby for two years!?

The explanation was in the story, they said that they have seen worse, so the maximum sentence was 'inequitable'. BS, I say. Though I am a 'leftist', the death penalty is too good for this person. However, I do believe that this would have been a better fit in the 'moral and religious' forum. Unless you want to argue it from a justice/legal perspective.

[Wilber]

"Cote cited the father of four's young age and lack of criminal record - other than the sexual assault of another child when he was 17 - in the ruling."

Say what! "lack of criminal record", Of course you have to disregard the fact that this is the second time he has done this. They talk like the first offense was a mere parking ticket.

"There was no violence, such as gagging, threatening or hitting the child,"

What do these twits think "sexual assault" is. "Gagging, threatening, hitting", This is not an adult but a defenseless two year old for cripes sake. Even worse.

[Riverwind]

Can one of you leftists explain to me the kind of liberal Canadian thinking that would justify reducing a 15 year sentence, to a cushy Canadian prison, for raping a baby for two years!?

The problem is not the judge - it is the laws they are expected to enforce. In our legal system the 'maximum' sentence for any given crime is supposed to apply to the worst examples of the crime so any criminal can ask for a shorter sentence if they can show there are other crimes that were worse. I, like TFB, think this guy deserves to be staked naked on top of a fire ant hill. However, the solution the is to increase the maximum sentance for child abuse to life in prison with no parole. If that was the case, the same judge would have reduced the sentance to 25 years using the same logic. However, I suspect there would still be people who would claim the judge was too lenient even in that case.

[I miss Reagan]

IMR,

Good to see you back.

Can one of you leftists explain to me the kind of liberal Canadian thinking that would justify reducing a 15 year sentence, to a cushy Canadian prison, for raping a baby for two years!?

The explanation was in the story, they said that they have seen worse, so the maximum sentence was 'inequitable'. BS, I say. Though I am a 'leftist', the death penalty is too good for this person. However, I do believe that this would have been a better fit in the 'moral and religious' forum. Unless you want to argue it from a justice/legal perspective.

Always good to be back, though I can't stay... too busy lately.

In our legal system the 'maximum' sentence for any given crime is supposed to apply to the worst examples of the crime so any criminal can ask for a shorter sentence if they can show there are other crimes that were worse.

I don't buy the judicial explanation. Does it mean that since of all the murders committed in Canada no one can recieve the maximum sentence because none of them are as heinous as say Robert Pickton's murders. I still say the Judges in this case are sick people.

If the problem is with the max/mins I want to know what the logic is of the legislators who decided the maximum for raping a child should be 15 years in our hotels we call prisons. Who are these people who feel compassion towards sexual offenders? There must be a lot of people who feel for these people otherwise we'd lock them up for good.

[Riverwind]

If the problem is with the max/mins I want to know what the logic is of the legislators who decided the maximum for raping a child should be 15 years in our hotels we call prisons. Who are these people who feel compassion towards sexual offenders? There must be a lot of people who feel for these people otherwise we'd lock them up for good.

I agree with this: blaming the judges for bad laws is unfair to the judges. In my opinion, the crime of raping a child is much worse than the planned killing of a gang member by another gang member. There are many other crimes which I feel are under punished because the victim is still technically alive.

[fixer1]

I think they should recuce this guys sentence from prison completely and make him move in next door to me. That way when his body is found hanging from a tree and the thing doing the hanging is his own disenboweled guts, then and only then will I say that is a proper sentence for this kind of individual. Oh well back to medication I guess

[I miss Reagan]

If the problem is with the max/mins I want to know what the logic is of the legislators who decided the maximum for raping a child should be 15 years in our hotels we call prisons. Who are these people who feel compassion towards sexual offenders? There must be a lot of people who feel for these people otherwise we'd lock them up for good.

I agree with this: blaming the judges for bad laws is unfair to the judges. In my opinion, the crime of raping a child is much worse than the planned killing of a gang member by another gang member. There are many other crimes which I feel are under punished because the victim is still technically alive.

Yes but the Judges still have discretion to impose the maximum of 15 years (even though it's not even close to enough). I don't believe that their hands were tied.

I think they should recuce this guys sentence from prison completely and make him move in next door to me. That way when his body is found hanging from a tree and the thing doing the hanging is his own disenboweled guts, then and only then will I say that is a proper sentence for this kind of individual. Oh well back to medication I guess

I wouldn't mind that but then you get people feeling sorry for the poor pedophile, like the ones who were tracked and killed in the US by that Nova Scotia kid.

Nevermind the justice aspect of it, how about the fact that in 9 years from now not including probation this guy is going to be living next door to you or me. There are all sorts of these people walking the streets in this country because of our "compassion".

[Wilber]

Another good case for mandatory minimums for certain crimes. Judges are always telling us that they have to do certain things because of sentencing guidelines from Parliament. A mandatory minimum is exactly that, a sentencing guideline from Parliament, so they should have no problem following it.

[scribblet]

I nearly whoopsed my cookies when I read that one, a reduced sentence for raping a baby...mein gotte - what is Canada coming too !!!

The judge certainly could have left the sentence as it was within his juristiction to do that...

[Riverwind]

Yes but the Judges still have discretion to impose the maximum of 15 years (even though it's not even close to enough). I don't believe that their hands were tied.

You are probably right. There would not have been a dissenting judge if it was an open and shut case.

[Guest Warwick Green]

Yes but the Judges still have discretion to impose the maximum of 15 years (even though it's not even close to enough). I don't believe that their hands were tied.

You are probably right. There would not have been a dissenting judge if it was an open and shut case.

It appears that 15 years was an above average sentence for the circumstances of this rape. Perhaps then we need to increase the sentences since I find it hard to envision anything more despicable than the rape of a 2-yr old.

[Charles Anthony]

Under a libertarian or anarchist community, this guy and these judges would suffer the wrath of the mob -- as they should.

You guys deal with your "rights granted by society" and this disgusting aftermath!

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Charles Anthony,

Under a libertarian or anarchist community, this guy and these judges would suffer the wrath of the mob -- as they should.

"If you listen to fools, the mob rules!"Black Sabbath

Libetrarianism does not espouse 'mob rule', but it offers nothing to prevent it.

[justcrowing]

Then if Judges have their hands tied - who are the legal beagles that write the laws? lawyers who later became judges; current lawyers? Methinks laws are designed by lawyers to keep them perpetually employed. :angry:

[Charles Anthony]

"who are the legal beagles that write the laws?"

Our politicians: the people to whom we sell our votes.

[BHS]

Can one of you leftists explain to me the kind of liberal Canadian thinking that would justify reducing a 15 year sentence, to a cushy Canadian prison, for raping a baby for two years!?

The problem is not the judge - it is the laws they are expected to enforce. In our legal system the 'maximum' sentence for any given crime is supposed to apply to the worst examples of the crime so any criminal can ask for a shorter sentence if they can show there are other crimes that were worse. I, like TFB, think this guy deserves to be staked naked on top of a fire ant hill. However, the solution the is to increase the maximum sentance for child abuse to life in prison with no parole. If that was the case, the same judge would have reduced the sentance to 25 years using the same logic. However, I suspect there would still be people who would claim the judge was too lenient even in that case.

What sort of person reviews two cases of child rape and assigns a weight to them? Why can't they all be regarded as "the worst"? Any adult who is sexually attracted to children (and I mean pre-pubescent children here, not sexually active teenagers) is incorrigible and should be classified as a dangerous offender on their first conviction and put away forever, or until such a time as a method of treatment is developed that changes their predilections. (Which, needless to say, will never happen - even if the possibility existed in theory, development of such a treatment would be vigorously fought against by homosexuals on the grounds that they too might be forced to undergo it as well.)

[justcrowing]

"who are the legal beagles that write the laws?"

Our politicians: the people to whom we sell our votes.

And most of our politicians are lawyers ///// Trudeau, Chretien, Martin, Mulroney, Dosanjh, and I am sure you know the rest. And these are the politicians that select the Judges. Are we back to square one yet? LOL

[Hicksey]

Can one of you leftists explain to me the kind of liberal Canadian thinking that would justify reducing a 15 year sentence, to a cushy Canadian prison, for raping a baby for two years!?

The problem is not the judge - it is the laws they are expected to enforce. In our legal system the 'maximum' sentence for any given crime is supposed to apply to the worst examples of the crime so any criminal can ask for a shorter sentence if they can show there are other crimes that were worse. I, like TFB, think this guy deserves to be staked naked on top of a fire ant hill. However, the solution the is to increase the maximum sentance for child abuse to life in prison with no parole. If that was the case, the same judge would have reduced the sentance to 25 years using the same logic. However, I suspect there would still be people who would claim the judge was too lenient even in that case.

What sort of person reviews two cases of child rape and assigns a weight to them? Why can't they all be regarded as "the worst"? Any adult who is sexually attracted to children (and I mean pre-pubescent children here, not sexually active teenagers) is incorrigible and should be classified as a dangerous offender on their first conviction and put away forever, or until such a time as a method of treatment is developed that changes their predilections. (Which, needless to say, will never happen - even if the possibility existed in theory, development of such a treatment would be vigorously fought against by homosexuals on the grounds that they too might be forced to undergo it as well.)

The reasons liberals dream up to be easy on criminals are getting pretty weak now I see. I'm still having trouble understanding how an act of rape can be much worse than in this case. Anyone that so victimizes a child should be put away until the child's resulting demons are eliminated. If that means never, then so be it.

Short of murder, there is nothing worse than victimizing a child like that.

[Riverwind]

What sort of person reviews two cases of child rape and assigns a weight to them?

That is what our legal system forces judges to do. Most of the rediculous lawsuits happen because judges or juries assess percentage of blame to different parties. For example, a judge decides that an employer was 10% responsible for drunk driving incident caused by an employee. This 10% translates into an award of several $100 thousand to the drunk employee who is 90% to blame. Most normal people would start off by saying that the drunk employee does not deserve any money so the percentage of blame is irrelevant. Unfortunately that is not the way the legal system works.

[justcrowing]

In a Liberal minded society, one is not responsible for their actions - it is everyone else's fault .... Doncha know it is our right to get drunk and kill while drinking & driving but your fault because I drank too much. Wonder what excuse is made for raping a baby? How was this baby at fault as a victim to give the assailant his right to rape? Sick! Sick! Sick!!

[I miss Reagan]

In a Liberal minded society, one is not responsible for their actions - it is everyone else's fault .... Doncha know it is our right to get drunk and kill while drinking & driving but your fault because I drank too much. Wonder what excuse is made for raping a baby? How was this baby at fault as a victim to give the assailant his right to rape? Sick! Sick! Sick!!

I completely agree. The definition of being progressive seems to be little by little taking away accountability from individuals. We getting very good at blaming the victims as well.

I still don't understand who and how they decided that 15 years was enough for a max. I don't even want to start on the minimums.

[Hicksey]

In a Liberal minded society, one is not responsible for their actions - it is everyone else's fault .... Doncha know it is our right to get drunk and kill while drinking & driving but your fault because I drank too much. Wonder what excuse is made for raping a baby? How was this baby at fault as a victim to give the assailant his right to rape? Sick! Sick! Sick!!

I completely agree. The definition of being progressive seems to be little by little taking away accountability from individuals. We getting very good at blaming the victims as well.

I still don't understand who and how they decided that 15 years was enough for a max. I don't even want to start on the minimums.

I keep saying it and I truly believe it is true -- the Liberals are trying to build a consequence free society.

Stories like the exemplar show exactly how ridiculous that idea is. Punishments may not dissuade people from committing crimes as effectively as in centuries past, but that hardly eliminates the need for a firm hand of justice.

[Rue]

I wish you would use the terms Liberal or Conservative consistently. Many people think

anything they disagree with is Liberal and anything they agree with is Conservative. In fact

being too lenient on a criminal sentence is neither Liberal or Conservative if we use those

two philosophies correctly not that most of you know the difference between Bentham and Burke.

More to the point this is not a left or right wing issue at all. Its an issue as to our criminal

laws and how they have been drafted. Its simplistic to say because they were drafted during

a Liberal government's era that makes them Liberal and therefore what this Judge has done

is enforce a Liberal law.

These so called Liberals don't sit around stating as part of their ideology child molesters should be given lenient sentences. That is naive. Plenty of so called Leftists or Liberals as just as right wing when it comes to this issue if that is how you want to describe it.

Such issues transcend left or right wing definition.

[legamus]

this sort of thing angers me perhaps more than anything else. i think most people, left-leaning or not, would be outraged by this. isn't there anything that we as citizens can do, someone to complain to, to stop this bullshit?? i'm tired of being impotently pissed off everytime i read about some piece of shit pedophile getting a lenient sentence for their crimes.