Two Children Murdered in Barrie, Ontario

[August1991]

This tragic case has been in the news for several days and there are still many unanswered questions. There have been other cases in Canada in which children have not been protected. I have noticed however that the Left has already started to develop a meme.

The failed marriage of Leonardo and Frances Elaine Campione was beset by criminal charges, court orders and a turbulent custody battle in the months leading up to the deaths of their two young girls, court documents show.

But several people who knew the couple, from former neighbours to a family counsellor, describe Elaine as an unstable, fiercely jealous woman who suffered from depression and suicidal thoughts.

Serena Campione, 3, and sister Sophia, 1, were discovered dead Wednesday in the Barrie apartment they shared with their mom, Elaine. The 31-year-old woman, who had summoned police with a 911 call, was charged with two counts of first-degree murder.

Yesterday Leonardo's family issued a statement saying: "We look forward to the public processes that will determine guilt and the inquest which will examine the catastrophic failure of the system and processes that should have protected the children it was meant to serve."

Questions about the system were raised by others too.

"My concern was that the woman had a chemical imbalance and needed a psychiatric assessment and my concern was for the children," said Franca Carella, executive director and founder of the social-services agency Vitanova Foundation of Woodbridge.

Toronto Sun

The Leftist meme is that social workers and family counsellors are overworked and underfunded. In this view, this tragedy occurred because of government cuts.

In fact though, as a percentage of GDP, government spending has never been higher and GDP itself has never been higher. As a society, we spend vastly more now in absolute terms on all manner of child care and child protection than we did in 1950.

Leftist schemes usually fall afoul of running out of other people's money. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed. Our own health care system will eventually stop working for a similar reason. There will never be enough money to achieve a Leftist's ideal but Leftists will never accept that. Instead, they'll have endless excuses to say the true ideal was never tried. That's what Leftists now say about the failed experience of Ontario's NDP, the Soviet Union and even the PQ.

Like drug addicts, Leftists will plead for a few million dollars more so that they can realize their project.

How much more public money should we devote to social work before we start to realize that government bureaucracy is not a good way to protect children?

[geoffrey]

What is the way to prevent such things other than strengthing mental health and social programs?

[Drea]

The killing of these children has nothing to do with political leftness or rightness.

If you had your ideal society with no social programs, how exactly would your ideal society have dealt with this situation?

Would your ideal society been able to find and weed out this problem before it occurred? If so, how?

[Charles Anthony]

How much more public money should we devote to social work before we start to realize that government bureaucracy is not a good way to protect children?

I am pessimistic. Like our failing health-care system, I believe that the only way things will change is if they hit rock bottom. Until our social programs (and ourselves) are bankrupt, we will still have people demanding more money for social programs. Even after that, I am sure the socialists will be in denial and put forth more pie-in-the-sky money-growing-on-trees policies.

What is the way to prevent such things other than strengthing mental health and social programs?

Simple: intervention from fellow citizens. The old fashioned way.

Here is a question for you: what would be the best thing to do if you saw (or suspected) a parent murderously abusing their kid?

A call 911

B call Dick Cheney and ask for advice

C wait for a socialist program director to intervene

D step in to defend the kid yourself

???

The killing of these children has nothing to do with political leftness or rightness.

How we deal with it and how we dealt with similar events in the past have a major influence.

If you had your ideal society with no social programs, how exactly would your ideal society have dealt with this situation?

Would your ideal society been able to find and weed out this problem before it occurred? If so, how?

I do not have an ideal society and neither does anybody else. Get one thing straight: child abuse and murder will always exist.

The best thing you can do is feel free to intervene to help your fellow citizens. Next, make it easier for other people to help their fellow citizens. That is how true prevention starts. Tax incentives to encourage charity is a good start.

We look to ghosts to solve our problems. We create "social programs" that we do not even understand let alone know exist. After they are created, we fund them and have complete blind trust that they will work without giving them a second thought.

[Drea]

The best thing you can do is feel free to intervene to help your fellow citizens.

Yup, a number of years ago I had a woman "intervene". I was at the grocery store and needed to discipline my then 2 year old who was doing what two year olds do, having a fit in the store. I spanked his bottom and she came along screaming at me that I was abusing my child. The following week, lo and behold, a social worker showed up to see "how we lived" and "if everything was ok." Turned out it was. If the woman had the authority to take away my child she would have. As it were the social worker knew exactly what a 2 year old can be like in the grocery store and I got to keep my child.

Next, make it easier for other people to help their fellow citizens. That is how true prevention starts.

She would have taken my child for absolutely no reason and my son would have grown up with no mother. Grrrreat.

Tax incentives to encourage charity is a good start.

Donating to charity is already a tax writeoff.

We look to ghosts to solve our problems. We create "social programs" that we do not even understand let alone know exist. After they are created, we fund them and have complete blind trust that they will work without giving them a second thought.

While I don't always agree that social services is doing a good job, they are necessary as stated in the above example.

[geoffrey]

Drea is absolutely correct in that criticism of vigilante action. There's a reason we have police, it's to control responses.

If your first response to an out of context situation is to shoot someone, well, I think we'll have alot more dead on our hands. The system won't always work, but I think police should be the primary defenders of the law, citizens only intervening in severe situations or when police response would be ultimately uneffective (ie. rural farmer getting attacked with a 6 hour RCMP reponse time).

If you had walked in and shot the mother, you may have saved the lives of the kids. That being said, if you just at whim took people's children away when you thought there was an injustice, like in Drea's case, then we'd have a whole lot bigger situation on our hands.

I think there is a place for self-defense, and defense of others. But scrapping the social system and police for a system of viglante law control isn't exactly desirable in my belief.

[Argus]

What is the way to prevent such things other than strengthing mental health and social programs?

Pray? There is no magical sollution. No amount of money will ever prevent some psycho from killing people. Think of the most socialist country in the West, I don't know, Sweden maybe. Guess what? There are murders in Sweden, murders, rapes, child abuse, robbery, wife beatings, and every other manner of crime and problems.

It's called humanity.

[Charles Anthony]

Argus is right. The socialists leave us no choice but to pray.

Hell, they might even outlaw prayer! Our only choice might be to shut up, pay our taxes, bend over and submit to the state!

Yup, a number of years ago I had a woman "intervene".

Yeah, my heart bleeds for your sorry-pride story.

The neighbors in Barrie should have intervened a little more forcefully than calling social services. It is people like YOU and your proud-parenting that make it difficult for neighbors to help out kids in troubled homes.

As it were the social worker knew exactly what a 2 year old can be like in the grocery store and I got to keep my child.

Stop complaining.

Do you want social programs or not?

I believe people should by-pass the social workers entirely and stick their nose in other people's affairs. Maybe a probing question in the laundry room or on the front steps: "I hear you and your hubby yelling and screaming all of the time. What is going on? How are the kids taking your abuse???"

She would have taken my child for absolutely no reason and my son would have grown up with no mother. Grrrreat.

You are not thinking. You are just responding emotionally.

If there was no reason, why would your son be taken away from you??

If the visit from the social worker hurting your feelings is the price that must be paid to prevent kids from being abused or killed, tough ruddy luck. You make me sick.

Donating to charity is already a tax writeoff.

I am talking more of a write-off.

Without socialist programs, only a selfish or evil person would think that charities would not pick up the slack.

While I don't always agree that social services is doing a good job, they are necessary as stated in the above example.

What example? What I see above is a confusing mess whereby the only thing that stands out is a parent whose pride was damaged.

Drea is absolutely correct in that criticism of vigilante action. There's a reason we have police, it's to control responses.

We have two dead kids and people who want us to call 911 while we turn our backs -- I mean, control responses. Congratu-****-ulations!

I think there is a place for self-defense, and defense of others. But scrapping the social system and police for a system of viglante law control isn't exactly desirable in my belief.

I am not afraid of vigilante justice.

[Drea]

Well, Charles you and your vigilante justice busters make me sick.

You'd have a child taken away from a mother "just in case" that spanking the neighbour saw was a sign of much wider abuse.

Thankfully we have a social system that does work in some instances. It works a helluva lot better than vigilante neighbours. While I've never been a fan of social services I am glad they were there if only to "rein in" the crazy lady who wanted to take my child.

I think we should take away your guns "just in case" you go crazy. (You are obviously volatile enough).

I think we should lock people like you up "just in case" your frothing at the mouth goes beyond simple words.

People like you do scare me. With your holier-than-thou attitude. Your "Father Knows Best" 1950's backass mentality.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The only solution is through the justice system. Granted that that system is completely fouled up, this problem as well as many other indicate that we need to review and redesign the system upon which our society is based upon. The rule of law is the ultimate science, and it is the responsibility of the government to undertake the necessary steps to protect its citizens through the attending bureaucracies that make up the infrastructure of government.

The problems of society are reflected in the policies and practices of its government. Without redefining the government with its policies and practices then it is not possible to address the problems as a society.

[sharkman]

Well, Charles you and your vigilante justice busters make me sick.

You'd have a child taken away from a mother "just in case" that spanking the neighbour saw was a sign of much wider abuse.

Thankfully we have a social system that does work in some instances. It works a helluva lot better than vigilante neighbours. While I've never been a fan of social services I am glad they were there if only to "rein in" the crazy lady who wanted to take my child.

I think we should take away your guns "just in case" you go crazy. (You are obviously volatile enough).

I think we should lock people like you up "just in case" your frothing at the mouth goes beyond simple words.

People like you do scare me. With your holier-than-thou attitude. Your "Father Knows Best" 1950's backass mentality.

Your incident makes me shake my head. But I hope that in a citizen helping world, your child wouldn't have been taken away because there would have been no social services.

However in today's reality, if you had the wrong social worker who sees spanking as abuse, who knows what might have happened. Never mind all the kids being raised where mom and dad like to get stoned in front of the kids.

[geoffrey]

What is the way to prevent such things other than strengthing mental health and social programs?

Pray? There is no magical sollution. No amount of money will ever prevent some psycho from killing people. Think of the most socialist country in the West, I don't know, Sweden maybe. Guess what? There are murders in Sweden, murders, rapes, child abuse, robbery, wife beatings, and every other manner of crime and problems.

It's called humanity.

Right, so the solution is to just give up, tell the police to go home, because we'll never win.

Come on Argus, it's not like you to be so light on law and order.

[Charles Anthony]

so the solution is to just give up, tell the police to go home,

There is a thought! Give up AND send the police home! Why did I not think of it myself! We could save a lot more money!

Would you still let us pray???

You do not get it. You socialists tie everybody's hands to the point where nothing gets done to prevent crime. You socialists reduce our "law and order" to nothing more than police chasing AFTER criminals AFTER crimes are committed. When some busy-body neighbor suspects child abuse, you get all enranged and offended. I repeat my congratulations on YOUR law and order.

I am glad they were there if only to "rein in" the crazy lady

Your incident makes me shake my head.

It makes me shake my head too because I ask: If only those dead kids in Barrie live next door to somebody who cared, where would they be now?

Never mind all the kids being raised where mom and dad like to get stoned in front of the kids.

Excellent! Nevermind those kids. To hell with them!

We should only concern ourselves with the parents whose pride will be shattered.

this problem as well as many other indicate that we need to review and redesign the system upon which our society is based upon. The rule of law is the ultimate science,

I think you are being naive. Our justice system is a gradual evolution and a product us. It is what WE want and what WE support. It is like any other sector of the economy.

Demanding an overhaul of the justice system is as valid as demanding an overhaul of our dependence on technology. Blaming societies ills on the amount of time wasted in front of computers instead of typewriters or complaining about having to go to automated tellers instead of waiting forever in line at the bank behind an old fogie chatting it up all day while cashing a $40 cheque or damning driving to work instead of walking are all useless and will go nowhere.

Thankfully we have a social system that does work in some instances. It works a helluva lot better than vigilante neighbours.

Better than what? Better than what happened to those two dead kids in Barrie?

Where was YOUR socialism for them?

While I've never been a fan of social services I am glad they were there if only to "rein in" the crazy lady who wanted to take my child.

You still can not look at any other family except your own, can you?

I think it is too bad that your "crazy lady" did not live in Barrie. Maybe the neighbors in Barrie are not crazy enough.

I think we should take away your guns "just in case" you go crazy. (You are obviously volatile enough).

I think we should lock people like you up "just in case" your frothing at the mouth goes beyond simple words.

You make extra-ordinary assumptions.

You strike your kid in public and say that I am volatile.

You assume that I have guns.

People like you do scare me. With your holier-than-thou attitude. Your "Father Knows Best" 1950's backass mentality.

Yes, my attitude is holier than your attitude.

You strike your kid in public and identify me as patriarchally old-fashioned.

Just out of curiosity: how old was your kid when you struck him in public?

[geoffrey]

so the solution is to just give up, tell the police to go home,

There is a thought! Give up AND send the police home! Why did I not think of it myself! We could save a lot more money!

Would you still let us pray???

You do not get it. You socialists tie everybody's hands to the point where nothing gets done to prevent crime. You socialists reduce our "law and order" to nothing more than police chasing AFTER criminals AFTER crimes are committed. When some busy-body neighbor suspects child abuse, you get all enranged and offended. I repeat my congratulations on YOUR law and order.

So you want to take vigilantism one step further. Pre-emptive strikes are allowed now too?

You've got to be kidding me. The one thing that scares me away from taking libertarianism as far as your comfortable with, is the stupidity of the average person. I know some pretty stupid people, if they perceive a threat, they can kill me (or imprision me in their private cells)?

Sillyness.

[Charles Anthony]

So you want to take vigilantism one step further. Pre-emptive strikes are allowed now too?

Why not? What would YOU do if you witnessed mortal child abuse?

Private cells?!?! Forgive me but the stupidity is on the other end. Why would anybody imprison you "in their private cells" pray tell? kill you? If you think there is anything now stopping stupid people from assaulting, you are right: it is your freedom to defend yourself.

[Argus]

Pray? There is no magical sollution. No amount of money will ever prevent some psycho from killing people. Think of the most socialist country in the West, I don't know, Sweden maybe. Guess what? There are murders in Sweden, murders, rapes, child abuse, robbery, wife beatings, and every other manner of crime and problems.

It's called humanity.

Right, so the solution is to just give up, tell the police to go home, because we'll never win.

Come on Argus, it's not like you to be so light on law and order.

I'm all for law and order, and I like preventive measures as much as the next guy. What I'm saying is that you cannot prevent some nut case from going nuclear. Look at the guy in Pennsylvania. By all accounts, a fairly ordinary, upstanding working guy with a wife and kids. He had no known mental illnesses and had never been in trouble with the law. What sets someone like that off? I don't know. Neither does anyone else.

I do know that given the sheer unpredictability of such people, you simply can't do anything to stop them. If you close off one option, they'll simply take another path. People who don't care if they live or die - who, in fact, want to die - have too many options available to them. Lock the schools and they'll shoot up a shopping mall. Take away their rifle and they'll make bombs or throw gasoline on crowds at a movie theatre or drive a truck through crowds. There are too many ways to kill people if you're willing to go too, so removing the most obvious is not going to make a significant dent in the population of crazy people taking others with them when they go nuts.

And I don't like this part of our society which believes the government can and must protect us from every threat, however minor, despite what the cost might be in terms of money, freedom and societal inconvenience.

[Argus]

So you want to take vigilantism one step further. Pre-emptive strikes are allowed now too?

Why not? What would YOU do if you witnessed mortal child abuse?

I'm not a doctor but - I don't believe any child ever died from a spanking. Your equating this with "mortal child abuse" is thus silly. You're in effect trivializing child abuse.

[Drea]

Just out of curiosity: how old was your kid when you struck him in public?

2 and a half.

By why am I justifying my behaviour to you?

You, who equates a swat on a diapered bum to abusing a child.

I was obviously wrong -- you must be an extreme left winger who believes children are tiny adults. And that one can reason with a 2 year old.

Face it, there is no predicting when an individual with go nuts and do crazy things. It happens. It's not the fault of society, the neighbours, or social services.

[Charles Anthony]

I don't believe any child ever died from a spanking. Your equating this with "mortal child abuse" is thus silly. You're in effect trivializing child abuse.

Actually, I never did make that connection.

It was Drea above who made that trivial connection by recountering a pride-bruising tale. Go back and review the thread.

I suggest intervention when there is mortal child abuse. Drea's tale-of-woe trivialized child abuse.

[Argus]

I don't believe any child ever died from a spanking. Your equating this with "mortal child abuse" is thus silly. You're in effect trivializing child abuse.

Actually, I never did make that connection.

It was Drea above who made that trivial connection by recountering a pride-bruising tale. Go back and review the thread.

I suggest intervention when there is mortal child abuse. Drea's tale-of-woe trivialized child abuse.

My comprehension skills are quite good, thanks. You suggested not only intervention, but vigilante intervention in her case - because she spanked her child. Then you talk here about "mortal child abuse". You need to do a better job differentiating between a woman swatting her whiny kid and actual child abuse.

[Charles Anthony]

My comprehension skills are quite good, thanks.

Before going to bed each night, I have one more thing for which to pray: improved global literacy. I now truly believe it can only come supernaturally.