And I Thought Our Justice System Was Screwed Up...

[brandbll]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/13/world/...html?hpt=hp_t4

Montreal, Canada (CNN) -- Canadians expressed outrage Thursday after the release of Guy Turcotte, a cardiologist who in 2009 confessed to killing his children as they slept in their beds.
What many wanted to know was how a father who stabbed his children dozens of times could be free after 46 months of confinement. Those voices echo the grief of Turcotte's ex-wife, Dr. Isabelle Gaston, the mother of 5-year-old Olivier and 3-year-old Anne-Sophie.

And here i thought the US justice system was screwed up. Canadians are letting people loose that murdered children in cold blood only a few years after he was convicted!!! The guy even said he's looking forward to opening up his practice again and HAVING MORE KIDS!! What is going on Canada??? You know what's ironic? Canada has super strict laws about not letting people visit their country who have DWI convictions(Driving While Intoxicated), but they have no problem letting Psychopathic murderers back into the public.

You gotta get your together Canada, you're slippin'...

[Stavroforos]

Queue people telling you that the law is the law, Canadian law is the law of the land, blah blah.

[brandbll]

The thing is, this guys says he is sane. But would a sane person stay sane knowing what they had done? I mean, if I just blacked out like this guy supposedly and murdered my family members in cold blood and then all of a sudden "woke up", i would be mentally ed for life. I would take my own life at that point knowing what i'd done. This guy is still cookoo and Canada is setting this guy back up in his fantasy land where he can do what he wants. They need to round up this guy, his lawyer, and the two shrinks who diagnosed him as well and they need to put them on a chunk of ice and shove them off into the ocean.

[XXXXJOSEFXXXX]

This is worse than thieves suing the owners they are trying to rob.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19879314

[NotYetRegistered]

I'm sure there is a context to this.

[brandbll]

I'm sure there is a context to this.

Yes, the context is "What the is wrong with Canada?"...

[AqD]

Yes, the context is "What the is wrong with Canada?"...

or the western world as a whole.

[nameless]

That's Canada for you.

All you have to say is you don't remember anything and they'll let you go.

Criminals are treated very well in Canada compared to victims. I don't know how much longer this'll go until people say enough is enough.

This is worse than thieves suing the owners they are trying to rob.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19879314

If you read through the comments you'll see that people are trying to defend the burgular's right saying that this could lead to an escalation and endanger their safety which is complete BS. Every circumstance is different and if someone breaks into your home you have every right to defend yourself as that guy is trespassing.

[Facupay]

As a law student I have to say that It's always tricky with mentally insane people when it come to penal justice.

I don't know how it works in Canada but it's pretty similar everywhere in the western world. In my country if someone comits a crime, and the judge (advised by a psychiatric board) considers that it was mentally insane at the moment of commiting it, he can't serve prision time but he needs something called curative measures (Medidas curativas) which means that he is sent to an asylum for the criminally insane with some security. The main difference with a regular sentence in a prision is that the criminal has to remain in the asylum until his psychiatrists consider he is cured and is no longer a threat to society. It can be indefinite or a few months.

And that's the problem with that system, it's all in the hands of the psychiatrists to determine how long the guy stays in the asylum and it can be really strained in these kind of cases of a well educated guy who just snaps once and then hes back to normal. He commited a heinous crime, but he was crazy when he did it, now he's no longer crazy so, according to that system, he has to return to society. It's all pretty gray. Now that he is no longer crazy should we sentence him again to prision for the same crime breaking "non bis inidem"?. And that is not even considering that the guy could have faked his mental illness, of course one would belive that the psychiatrists should know better than him and see through is lies. Or should we just ingore the existence of really insane people that need medical treatment and just sentence every criminal to a regular prision sentence just in case?

Technically an insane person can't commit a crime as he isn't guilty, he isn't a reasonable human being, it's not his fault, it's like blaming a gun because someone got shot. Justice can only try to cure him or if that's impossible to keep him away from society.

This also can lead to an age-old debate of whether penal justice should be centered on retribution or restoration.

[nameless]

As a law student I have to say that It's always tricky with mentally insane people when it come to penal justice.

I don't know how it works in Canada but it's pretty similar everywhere in the western world. In my country if someone comits a crime, and the judge (advised by a psychiatric board) considers that it was mentally insane at the moment of commiting it, he can't serve prision time but he needs something called curative measures (Medidas curativas) which means that he is sent to an asylum for the criminally insane with some security. The main difference with a regular sentence in a prision is that the criminal has to remain in the asylum until his psychiatrists consider he is cured and is no longer a threat to society. It can be indefinite or a few months.

And that's the problem with that system, it's all in the hands of the psychiatrists to determine how long the guy stays in the asylum and it can be really strained in these kind of cases of a well educated guy who just snaps once and then hes back to normal. He commited a heinous crime, but he was crazy when he did it, now he's no longer crazy so, according to that system, he has to return to society. It's all pretty gray. Now that he is no longer crazy should we sentence him again to prision for the same crime breaking "non bis inidem"?. And that is not even considering that the guy could have faked his mental illness, of course one would belive that the psychiatrists should know better than him and see through is lies. Or should we just ingore the existence of really insane people that need medical treatment and just sentence every criminal to a regular prision sentence just in case?

Technically an insane person can't commit a crime as he isn't guilty, he isn't a reasonable human being, it's not his fault, it's like blaming a gun because someone got shot. Justice can only try to cure him or if that's impossible to keep him away from society.

This also can lead to an age-old debate of whether penal justice should be centered on retribution or restoration.

Then what would you say about the case where a man killed his wife, pleaded insantiy, and THEN tried to collect his wife's insurance? It's so obvious that criminals are pretty much taking advantage of it whether they can.

Last I checked I think he was entitled to it because he was not criminally responsible for his wife's death.

While I understand your position what baffles me is that there is zero consideration for the victim as the attention is focused on the criminal and what society can do to help him/her instead of the victim which is why there's a lot of anger because in the end it always SWAYS to the criminal.

[Facupay]

Then what would you say about the case where a man killed his wife, pleaded insantiy, and THEN tried to collect his wife's insurance? It's so obvious that criminals are pretty much taking advantage of it whether they can.

Last I checked I think he was entitled to it because he was not criminally responsible for his wife's death.

While I understand your position what baffles me is that there is zero consideration for the victim as the attention is focused on the criminal and what society can do to help him/her instead of the victim which is why there's a lot of anger because in the end it always SWAYS to the criminal.

As I said the system has many problems and relies on the competence and morality of the psychiatrists as they are the supposed experts in that field, the judge just can't dismiss what a guy that has dedicated his life to the study of the mind says about someone who can be insane.

The law tries to be fair and to help people who really need it, if other amoral people use it to their advantage and the psychiatrists can't determine they are lying, well, I don't really know how to solve that.

The thing is, I can't realistically imagine anything better than what we have now, with all it's flaws and occasional problems.

[AqD]

Technically an insane person can't commit a crime as he isn't guilty, he isn't a reasonable human being, it's not his fault,

Then he wouldn't be a qualified human being, but rather a beast with human-like appearance. When a beast hurts someone, you kill it.

[Facupay]

Then he wouldn't be a qualified human being, but rather a beast with human-like appearance. When a beast hurts someone, you kill it.

Or you could try to improve his situation like a civilized society.

It seems weird that the guy was released just 4 years after the crime but we just can't be a vindictive mob because something seems wrong, we don't know the details of the case and we don't have his medical history, the board of psychiatrists that considered he was sane and no longer a threat to society has it.

[Mangalore]

...
And that's the problem with that system, it's all in the hands of the psychiatrists to determine how long the guy stays in the asylum and it can be really strained in these kind of cases of a well educated guy who just snaps once and then hes back to normal. ....

It's a great system. Here in germany we found that we had locked up a whistleblower on tax fraud and bribery for years in a psychatric ward for paranoid delusions. Great stuff!

As a cop once told me only when a Judge's wife or relative is killed by the same people that he released or when the psychiatrists that defend these people get in harm's way will they actually start taking things seriously and think about the other side.

Look at the mass shooters that survived and are in jail. Most cases so much effort is given to help them because they are the "victims" there's barely any consideration for the actual victims it's ridiculous.

That's just populist resentment. The state has to ensure it measures the kind of force it brings down on people because the state can essentially destroy anyone's life in a heartbeat. Additionally the care insane criminals get is really practical. We know how to deal with tragedy and what to give the victims, we need investigations to figure out insanity. Don't mistake attention with sympathies.

Other than that: Justice systems can screw up. That's why Canada has a legislative initiative to change the law. Cut Justicia some slack. The poor gal is blindfolded half of the time.


And there is the small rule that we do not change law on case to case basis. Yes, it's despicable. But that the problem of jury systems in criminal cases aka letting laymen evaluate difficult assessments by professionals. Usually people listen to professionals when they are in over their heads. Not that a sole judge panel can't make wrong calls, too.

The question is really what strings are attached to his release. I don't believe there are none. Any common criminal coming out of prison has to follow certain guidelines and obligations.

[XXXXJOSEFXXXX]

This also can lead to an age-old debate of whether penal justice should be centered on retribution or restoration.

Penal justice should be centered around retribution. An eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. They should restore capital punishment to deter future crimes.

[Blaze86420]

RAWR RAWR OUTRAGE RAWR, IM SO ANGRY NO REALLY I AM I HAVE A PERSONAL CONNECTION TO THIS STORY WTF CANADA RAWR.

[TheDarkKnight]

Well, when he kills again, people will (maybe) wake up.


Releasing these people is the worst thing in the world. I don't understand the mindset at all. What will it take before people will realize that criminals are...oh, I don't know...CRIMINALS?


Apparently, it will take the death of many innocents.

[nameless]

As a cop once told me only when a Judge's wife or relative is killed by the same people that he released or when the psychiatrists that defend these people get in harm's way will they actually start taking things seriously and think about the other side.

Look at the mass shooters that survived and are in jail. Most cases so much effort is given to help them because they are the "victims" there's barely any consideration for the actual victims it's ridiculous.

[YukonTrooper]

Countries across the Western world have questionable justice outcomes like this.

[brandbll]

Even with the insanity defense that usually only keeps you out of prison in the US. You still get locked up in a mental institution and if they find you sane they move you to a prison to serve out the rest of your sentence. I don't even get why the insanity plead comes to play in these cases. I mean, what's to plead? The guy murdered his two little girls in cold blood, of course he's insane. I'm fairly certain you can't do something like that and still be right in the head.