I didn’t read all the links provided, but was there any word from his staff on what he was like to work with?
The interview seems mostly about how hard it was for lawyers and clerks to deal with viewing the graphic evidence Williams created of his crimes.
What I’d prefer is some insight into why he decided to plead guilty to first degree murder. Obviously, they have a ‘mountain’ of evidence to convict him - including videos he took of him committing the crimes, his confession, etc. - but, as is noted in the article, the imposition of a mandatory minimum of life wthout parole for 25 years makes it “highly unusual” for anyone, no matter how obviously guilty, to actually plead guilty to first degree murder.
Williams’ wife is currently in a fight with the media about whether her divorce proceedings should be open to the public: Williams’ wife not entitled to ‘private justice’ - Divorce case should be open, media outlets argue
One can certainly understand why she would want as much as possible to be private. On the other hand, the public, and especially the family of the victims needs to have access to this, as it also has hooks into any civil proceedings: current or planned.
God, I really feel for her though. One minute she’s living a privileged life with her husband-Colonel, and within minutes her house is being torn apart and he’s pleaded guilty to rape and murder.
It’s impossible to even imagine how mind-reeling this must have been.
I don’t see how or why. It would seem to be to be her business and not mine or yours. Perhaps there is some Canadian law that I am unaware of.
There’s two things:
first, there’s the open court principle. This is a fundamental aspect of how our courts operate, and you need to have a very good reason to close court proceedings and court files from the public. Traditionally, the courts are more willing to consider such applications in family matters, particularly if there are minor children involved, but the presumption is open court.
second, at least one of Williams’ assault victims is suing him, and is alleging that he fraudulently transferred assets to his wife to shelter them from the lawsuit. The victim has named the wife as a defendent in that action. That victim certainly has an interest in knowing exactly how the transfer of assets occurred, when, and for what reason.
Is there a way that they could make the financial matters available to the victim who is suing, but not making the whole divorce file open to the public and the media?
Yes, there is. The issue is not could, but rather if the Court should.
My guess? He loves his wife and does not want the media circus to destroy her. By pleading out, rather than having a long trial and long appeals, he will not cause his wife to be subjected to the media for as long a time. When weighed against the possibility that he might win at trial (apparently almost zero chance), it’s a very reasonable decision on his part.
and of course, the lawyers can’t disclose his motive for pleading, unless he gives them instructions to do so. hence the article focuses on how it affected them personally and professionally.
My guess, he’s no fool, and has transferred his assets to protect them from going to his victims families. He’s a clever man, pretty clearly.
I say, open the records and let’s see. If, as I think will become evident, he has attempted an end run around the distribution of his assets to his victims families, then she has been complicit in that, and does not deserve the anonymity she has so far been granted.
Eh. Possibly - but this guy seems awfully rapey and homicidal to have that sort of empathy for another human being.
Canadian’s, including the press, have been more than willing to protect her from a circus, and have done so.
That could change if it come out she’s been complicit in this attempt to protect assets.
I’m not sure I’m understanding all of the divorce/civil proceedings/wife involvement, but I’m not entirely sure I can condemn her for wanting some assets from her marriage - she finds out her husband is a monster, and now she has to become destitute from his crimes, with all her money going to the victims as well? (But like I said, I don’t fully understand all of this.)
She’s a victim too, and I would say on par with the families of the victims. He’s torn apart everything she believed about her life. She should be entitled to whatever split of assets would be typical for a divorce and any lawsuit settlements should come out of what is left in his name.
There’s no reason why it needs to be public - let a judge or forensic accountant examine the divorce documents and determine if there was an attempt at fraud.
The latest episode of L&O:LA was definitely at least lightly based on Col. Williams.
Oh? What was it about/how did it resemble, for those of us who don’t watch L&O?
Spoilered for those who might watch it (although I’m pretty sure this version of L&O is on it’s death bed)
[spoiler]
The crimes followed the same progression, they included pictures of the killer posing in underwear, they caught him using a tire tread. He was a secret service agent who had protected presidents and heads of state (instead of piloting their planes) and he was physically similar to Col. Williams.
He did not however confess and make their lives easier - better TV if you have to break him I guess :)[/spoiler]
Publication ban: Russell Williams divorce to stay muzzled | CBC News
What’s really weird about this is the press can’t even mention “the wife’s” name any more. Mary Elizabeth Harriman’s name has been in the news for a year and a half and now suddenly no one can utter it?
Wild and wacky stuff.