Err…I did. Did you? It says just what I said. He had an extradition hearing. The judge ordered he be sent back to face trial. His wife appealed to the American consel. He said he couldn’t do anything other that “visit” him.
His wife and lawyer vow to fight on because they don’t believe he can get a fair trial.
They don’t stand much of a chance. Extradition with Canada is pretty automatic outside of death penalty cases. But of course they’re going to try.
As it stands now the court has ordered him back (which I believe is the title of your linked article.)
Yes, but the article also says he still has various avenues for appeals and that the process could take as much as 90 days. It’s hardly a done deal, as Karl Gauss points out.
An immature egg in your 4 year old mother’s ovaries that didn’t shoot a cop.
I’m with the posters who say that we don’t know enough about his guilt or innocence and it is best left to the legal system. However, if he is guilty, I am not prepared to accept he is a “new person”. If he is guilty he needs to start serving his sentence, without the length of time he has gotten away with it taken into account. Don’t want to spend your twilight years rotting away in jail? Simple solution: turn yourself in after the crime, or even better, don’t shoot a cop. Hey, worked for me when I was 19!
I think the pass the OP was referring to is the fact that a guy wanted by the police – whether or not he’s eventually found to be guilty – could be left alone in Canada for decades without anyone doing anything about it, in spite of repeated requests from some of the people involved.
Anyways, you should all watch the movie “The History of Violence” for an interesting take on a similar subject.
The question is, why do we put people in jail? If its punishment or revenge, then he should go (assuming he is guilty), if its to make the streets safer, this guy apparently is as much of a threat as I am, if its to rehabilitate, there doesn’t appear to be a need.
You seem to believe in the first. Not everyone does. Personally, I’d rather save my tax dollars than try and jail a guy who I don’t need to be kept safe from.
There’s another reason: deterrence. We put a criminal in jail even if neither punishment nor rehabilitation would have much effect on him as an example to would-be criminals. Let someone go because there’s no point in punishing or rehabilitating him, and suddenly you’ve created a loophole in the system that others might be inclined to try to use. Consistent application of the law works to deter people from trying to break it.
I’m not saying I agree with that in this case, just that it’s another reason for putting people in jail. Frankly, I’m for leaving the guy the hell alone, especially if what happened happened in the 70s. I’m wondering what the statute of limitations is for what he did.
Hummmmm in non death penalty cases, the Canadian’s seem willing to accept all our criminals and will fight for them if we want them back…???
Why not just let all thew conviced fellons go to Canada, strip the bad guys of their citizenship and put them on a ‘shoot on sight’ list if they ever return…
I thank the Canadians for solving our prision problem…
We didn’t accept him anymore than your country accepts the illegal immigrants working down there. He is an illegal alien who allegedly commited a crime in the U.S. Once the extradition request was made he was arrested and he now sits in a cell awaiting deportation. Due process is not something that is doled out capriciously. His lawyer would be remiss in not exploiting all legal options to prevent his return. It took something like a decade before we could ship that bastard Charles Ng back and it certainly wasn’t because we were in his corner. As for a shoot on sight list… :rolleyes:
I’m slightly confused here. I don’t see Updike saying that the Canadian legal system is giving the accused a pass. It seems to me that Updike is lambasting the man’s supporters.
I also seem to recall him being taken down in the library at gunpoint. I could be mistaken but I’d be surprised he wasn’t. Don’t misunderstand Canadian politeness.
To point out the obvious, what if you happen to resemble some criminal on the list ? I’m a fairly average looking guy; I’m sure any number of bad guys look enough like me to confuse any hypothetical bounty hunters/assassins. I’d rather avoid getting shot by mistake, thank you.
I don’t know either. What are the possible sentences for desertion, skipping bail, becoming a fugitive, and whatever Canadian laws he’s violated? Since he’s 56 years old, I think 30 years in jail would be a good start. If that amounts to a life sentence, so be it.
It’s the victim, not the alleged victim. There’s no doubt the police officer was the victim of a violent crime. Pannell is the “alleged shooter” because there is an allegation he committed the crime but his guilt or innocence has not been determined by a court as of yet.
Also the following things should be accepted as true, because the Chicago Sun-Times just wouldn’t make this stuff up, and the information in question is the type that a newspaper would be able to easily verify:
-He was illegally in Canada, because legally speaking he had fled while out on bail
-He did live under an assumed name, there doesn’t seem to be any reason to doubt that.
-Since he was living under an assumed name and used an assumed name when he was married, then I would say the veracity of his marriage is put into question.