Hi there...I just wanted to post this, I guess in a way to vent...

I really believe that Karla should have gotten more time for the horrendous things she has done...don't get me wrong here when I say this but....a deal was made with the Crown in regards to her case and now they are trying everything possible to infringe on her freedom. Under the law she has done her time for the crime, there should be no conditions placed on her after her release as her complete sentence will be finished. I am not posting this to cause a heated debate, I am just curious if there is anyone else that not necessarily agrees with what I am saying, but understands me. I don't know maybe I have faith that someone can change, I don't know, maybe a downfall from working for defence counsel. Thanks for letting me get it off my chest.

Crimlaw

Who is Karla?

Karla is a woman who was married to a man by the name of Paul Bernardo....they tortured and murdered two teenage girls and Karla's sister quite a few years ago and Karla is getting out of jail next month there is a media frenzy and last minute court cases to put strict conditions on her. It is a bad case, but the deal was made with the crown and they have to live the outcome of it now.

Probably better known as Karla Homolka....

Here are some articles related to the topic of this thread.

AP story on CrimeLibrary.com -

http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/ap...da_release.html (http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/ap/0605/0206_homolda_release.html)

CrimeLibrary's original file:

http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_...do/index_1.html

JJT

:twocents: Unfortunately professional psychiatrists and CSC staff (for whatever their opinion is worth) beleive that Karla will likely commit a similar offence, particularly as she is involved with a convicted murderer (her boyfriend).

True, she did the 12 years. But did she really do the time for her crime? The public beleives that they were ripped off with this deal with the devil. She did not completely state the truth. In fact she totally covered up and lied about the extent of her involvement. Had the crown decided to renege on the deal and "re-charge" her, that would have blown the whole "plea bargain system" in which the crown depends on in a lot of cases.

Being one of Canada's most horrendous crimes makes it party to being sensationalized...Canadians want to know that life is not going to be easy for her.

Kassiesgma
(just my opinion)

I believe that you are right about the Canadian people, we do just want to make sure that her life is not an easy one and compared to other inmates it has been very easy so far, especially since we did pay for her to get a university degree and all, yet we will not pay for non-inmates! Plus you must understand that since she is in Canada she gets off so easy with our laws because if this happened in the US she would have gotten the Death Penelty, no questions asked and I think that is what has everyone up in arms!

Hi


If you read all about this past case..You will understand why
What happened was horrific.
and yes she participated..even videotaped the teens they kidnapped
etc etc..and murdered them.(big case too much to say here)

and yes if she was in the states..she would have got the death penalty
along with her husband. She ratted so to speak on the husband
and got 12years.
Canadians and justice system feel she needs to be monitored while she is out.
I feel she should yes.
Yes I understand what was said..that she did her sentence and leave her alone.......I understand that sentence
BUT if she IS a threat to society.....
they can;t let a person run around....BUT
in the u.s ...they have supervised release.....with all sorts of conditions
usually for 3,5,10 years etc. after a person gets out of prison.
Basically..........thats really what the Canadian lawyers and justice system(and victims family) want..and other citizens
for her to have suprervised release....after she gets out
just like the u.s does.
Inmates in the states..do their time........become free
but still have to do their probation.
She did horrific things....
so in my opinion...its ok for her to have probation/supervised released
just like all the other federal inmates coming out.
A small drug charge...will get you 5 years of supervised release in the states
have to inform PO when they move, travel.etc can;t be friends with convicted felons..etc
thats what they are asking for basically

tada!

What some of the non-Canadians may not realize is that it wasnt till after a deal was struck with her testifying against her husband that they realized with evidence how very much she was involved in the crimes and wasnt just 'a controlled wife' as she was often thought of at the beginning. I believe it was after that deal the the video tapes were allowed into evidence which showed her very much involved very willingly.
I think most Canadians were horrified when they realized her role vs her sentence, but it was to late by then, the deal was stuck. And further horrified by how she somehow has managed to remain in the press with her various antics, relationships, sex threw prison fences, ordering expensive Victoria Secret , having a computer in her cell, and other things that I cant remember, all while in prison. Im not sure we all needed to know all that really, all it did was add to her attention seeking behaviour.

But she does have a family that is also a victim of her crimes. I cant even imagine how hard it has been on them. They have lost two daughters really and probably any sense of normal life at all. Its all very sad.

Witchlinblue

Well, I am very familiar with the case as i grew up near St. Catherines. I have also read the books as well. I will tell you (as a crim student) that she DID strike a deal with crown and she managed to get 12 years (which, trust me people is a LONG sentence in Canada), and if you were to speak in terms of "lengh", and believe that she didn't get enough "time" well, I don't really agree with that because I'm not a believer in "punishment" based models of corrections. I will not get into that though.. just wanted to say that despite the "evilness" of the crime, a sentence of 12 years is LONG..

Having said that, she is finished her sentence, and so according to the law they have no right to put conditions on her, despite what the "public" wants. The general public I'm afraid isn't as educated as the people who are in charge of making these decisions, and therefore should have no say in it.

The general public I'm afraid isn't as educated as the people who are in charge of making these decisions, and therefore should have no say in it.

Im not sure I agree with you. I think there are quite a few 'well educated' members of the general public, many of whom come to PTO and post. I also dont feel that the law makers and legal decision makers are the most educated people, they are after all mostly being dictated by laws that have been already established by other people.

The Canadian jurists are, I suspect, trying to stretch the 12 years. Can't blame them, since she'll probably do something else horrid, and they'll really catch it then. What it sounds like is that people would like something like our current "civil commitment" process. It can sentence convicts to more time in a different type of institution or very heavy supervision, after their actual sentences are completed. Usually used for SOs.

They know they made a bad deal with a psycopath, and it sounds like they're just trying to push it down the road. Really can't blame them, she's a nightmare!

I beleive that even the people that made the deals with Karla regrete it and have said as much, but to go back and change it would put our whole legal system in trouble and no one wants that! I think that they should take this case and learn from it, change what needs to be changed so that it will never happen again, not just try to push it under the rug! The bed has been made and now we will pay, but what is stopping us from changing things for the next time!

As for the coment about the educated made the deal so we have no right to say any different I do not agree, if anything the amount of education has nothing to do with it, it is who was in the position at the time to make the deal with devil! Not how smart they were, they dropped the ball and that is all there is to it and it is not even all that, they did what they thought was a good deal, but got screwed royally! I don't think they like it any better then the rest of Canada and are only trying to do what they can now, it is the laws that need to be changed here!

Just my two cents!

Ooops! I worded it wrong!! I didn't mean educated in general.. sorry.. i meant educated in this field!! I'm sorry!!

Didnt mean to stomp on toes... I meant when it comes to criminology and for people working in corrections and stuff, and the people who decide that she is ready for release and what not, they are educated in the field and so they know what is right and wrong for her. The general public, being those who aren't in crim, or work in crim, are of course entitled to opinon, but those opinons are often skewed by the what media wants us to believe, and are often false.

In other words i will use another example. When you go to the doctor s/he tells you what is wrong with you based on your symptoms because s/he is educated and knowledgable to have the right too, but i doubt you would get the right answer for your problems by asking the general public.... that's what i mean.


Im not sure I agree with you. I think there are quite a few 'well educated' members of the general public, many of whom come to PTO and post. I also dont feel that the law makers and legal decision makers are the most educated people, they are after all mostly being dictated by laws that have been already established by other people.

I am sorry but this hits home for me right now as Gage and I jsut went through a hearing for an 8.10 order and it sucks. No other way to put it. In my personal opinion if u do your whole sentence and you hit your warrant expire date then why should u have to have stipulations. Yes what she did was horrible but locking her up for the rest of her life isnt the answer. I am not one to say what the answer is but obviously her deal was done before anyone realized the full extent of her involvement but still .... I really dont think the 8.10 order is fair at all....
Just my 2 cents... Jill

I really dont follow this as she sickens me as does this deal.. she killed her own sister,, and it wsnt accidental but judgemnet aside... why isnt she consdiered a sex offender.. I am reading about this guy in ontario and the residents are putting up fliers as being a so he had to notify the area.. so they are making his life rough.. yet she can slip into calm.. notice there are no recent photos of her.. it is because she has had altering surgery to change her appearance for her safety ...

she also completed a law degree at U of T... via web cam ... sooo she can be a lawyer too

at our costs by the way,,, arent we darn nice...
but bottom line why doesnt she have to follow so standards as that to me is not fair she raped and killed...
ummm as I said I dont read much on this as it is nasty

Actually Arriana you are incorrect. If she has any degree at all she would have had to pay for it as Corrections Canada does not offer anything past a high school degree for free. There probably isn't any photos of her because it isn't like people can go in and click away at her, she'd probably just aged.

well she has been to court a lot recently .. and yes you can hide your appearance but I know from a reputable source she has had surgery...
but interesting on the education... i stand corrected on that point

she took her classes with someone I know as I am in toronto, and she took them via video feed...

but why isnt she labeled a so as so many others have to deal with that with less vicious crimes
that really is my main query..
I dont like her deal and in truth that was why I truly stopped paying attention to this case years ago.. I live near the scarbourough rapist struck often... so this did bring worry to me .. the amount of mistakes in this whole case was just sad

I also thought that the government paid for her degree, I know that they no longer pay but I thought she did this when she first went in and they still did, but I could be wrong also!

If there is anything worse than a sadistic psychopath, it's a sadistic psychopath with a law degree.

Actually every news report that I have read has stated that Karla obtained a degree in Psychology.I have also read in many articles that she did not have to pay for her education. Part of the Globe and Mail article June 5,2005.

Homolka's psychiatric report released
Canadian Press
Montreal —
“She planned on changing her name and appearance,” the report noted, information that is echoed in more recent reports and by obvious attempts to darken her hair colour before last week's court appearance in Joliette, north of Montreal.
An evaluation done last month by Dr. Louis Morissette notes Ms. Homolka did obtain a bachelor's degree in psychology from Queen's University but was unable to pursue studies in sociology because no correspondence course was offered. She's interested in possibly furthering her education once released.
The former veterinarian's assistant also took computer courses."

I don't know about Karla...but my husband has been in for 22 years and never has college or university courses been free. They have to apply for OSAP just as we do on the street. I also went to Queens University and was told this at the Registrar's office when I enquired one day because I was paying for my degree.
I think its a misconception printed in the media...that inmates get so much.
Kassiesgma

Yes, unfortunately the media miscontrews everything, which realllllllllly makes me angry since i am so passionate about crim. In certain circumstances, i believe that a free education is a good thing for some inmates, and this is coming from a starving student who can barely afford a haircut, let alone the $5000 i pay a year for school!

Take a look at my example though, and you'll understand why. Say you have a woman who is in and out of jail for prostitution or drugs. I think, from a financial point of view it makes much more sense to pay the $20, 000 it would cost for her education, as oppose to the $165, 000 it costs, per year, that she is in prison. In canada is costs approxiamtely $450 a day for a female inmate. Now, say you did this from the beginning, you would hopefully prevent future incarceration for this female, because if she has an education and a better job, she won't need to rely on the streets to help support herself and her children (if any).. now of course it won't work on everyone, but i am willing to bet that in most cases it will work.

What do you think?

Well I hope that the rumour of her changing her appearance is true, because I would take that to mean that she intends to want to get on with her life with 'no more drama' and that she has no intentions of being in the press much longer with her various attention getting antics. I would like to think that she has done her time and plans not to repeat the past and her only way of getting any peace from the watchful eyes of the press would be to change her appearance. I really hope that she does make it and lives a crime-free (victim free too) life, perhaps with some therapy thrown in. Wishful thinking Im sure but she has done her time fair and square.
If they wanted to keep control of her, they should have let her out on parole last year and then they could have controlled a lot for quite a period of time but they didnt, so she has done her time and I guess we can only pray that she isnt the monster that she was. There is really no evidence to say that she is, but I guess we will find out eventually (sad to say). Hopefully she will just become part of legal history and melt into society.

Witchlinblue

Inmates in Canada are not given 'free' university educations. She had to pay for it.

Just last week Karla was shown on TV going to court. Her appearance has not changed. Mind you the global (Toronto) camera only got a side view of her in the prison van with her face covered but her hair is still blonde...maybe a shade or two darker than her earlier pictures.