So, for a while at least, a Quebec judge removed the restrictions that had been placed on Karla Homolka after serving her joke of a sentence.
Well I say good for him. I don’t understand how it was okay to apply this restrictions in the first place. She had served her 12 years, the full term, how can more punishment be given to her after she has already served her time? I don’t recall this ever happening with any other criminal in Canada. Of course IANAL so my experience with the legal system is limited to speeding tickets and a few teenage indiscretions.
Regardless of whether or not the 12 year initial sentence was right and just, it was what was agreed to. How can they go back on that agreement just because it now seems to have been a little to lenient? I was disgusted when the restrictions were first placed on her, not because I think she deserves better (she is an evil woman) but because I thought our justice system should act better.
Now Quebec has decided to appeal. I hope they lose.
Was the original agreement specifically made under false pretenses? If the lenient sentence was based on some claim by Homolka about the degree of her culpability that was later proven false, I’d say the government was off the hook for standing by the original agreement.
Well there is a little confusion about that. The original agreement was made when the crown attorney believed they needed her to get the real bad guy. The real bad guy was Paul Bernardo, the scaroborough rapist as well as murderer of 2 girls after raping them. Homolka helped with the raping and murdering of 2 girls. Well 3 really, the 3rd being Homolka’s youngest sister who she gave to Bernardo as a Christmas present. She/they drugged and raped her, and she ended up dieing by choking on her own vomit. This crime, IIRC, was never charged to either person.
Ok, so the crown has Homolka, is pretty sure Bernardo is the rapist and the murderer, she claims to have that beaten wife syndrome thing (he did beat the hell out of her at least once) and is willing to turn against him for leniency. They agree to 12 year sentence as long as Homolka isn’t found guilty of any other crimes. Deal done.
While this was going on lo and behold Bernardo’s lawyer had found video tapes of the killings and rapings, but he kept them. Didn’t turn them in until much later, after the deal was done. Very few people have seen this tapes I am not one of them. Supposedly they contain some sick shit, Homolka helping rape, being all girly girly with the girls, lots of other stuff.
The crown now wouldn’t have needed Homolka’s testimony and the tapes show a little more then what she admitted to. However they stick with the deal.
Fast forward 12 years, the Ontario public(maybe all of Canada, not sure) is outraged that Homolka is getting out. The Ontario justice ministry appeals to Quebec (where Homolka served her sentence) to put certain restrictions on her when she was released, such as having to report to the police, not able to associate with children/cons, not able to change her appearance, etc…
To me the Crown blew its chance to go back on this deal 12 years ago. It is now attempting to increase the punishment after the fact. I have trouble with that.
What’s keeping the Crown from prosecuting her for her role in her sister’s rape and death? I would think that would be a slam dunk conviction, and an easy way to put her back in prison?
What’s keeping the Crown from prosecuting her for her role in her sister’s rape and death? I would think that would be a slam dunk conviction, and an easy way to put her back in prison?
Sorry for the double post.