Let me just clarify certain statements made regarding this case...
QUOTE
The issue of Homolka is not one of leniency or severity, it is a case of happenstance. A favourable plea bargain was struck with her before other damning evidence came to light, evidence which would have made a plea bargain unecessary.
Evidence was
withheld from authorities until after this agreement was struck. At the time the Crown attorney's felt that making the deal (which has just expired) was the only way of convicting and incarcerating Paul Bernardo, who is still considered arguably the second-most dangerous man ever in Canada; with
Robert Picton 'edging ahead.'
QUOTE
I'm familiar with the story of Karla Holmolka. She may have become educated in prison, but she was manipulated by a truly evil man in her ex-husband. She isn't a person that engenders much sympathy, but apparently Canadian officials consider her no longer a threat to society. Let's hope they are right.
Unfortunately, this is not true either. Homolka was manipulated to a degree, but many now suspect her of being much more involved in the crimes which brought her husband down. She offered up her own sister as a drugged-out rape victim to her then fiancee as an engagement present and filmed the murders of their other two confirmed victims. This woman is
evil.
That being said, I have to take issue with Sleeper's questions:
Is Canada's criminal justice system to lenient?
Would you agree if the U.S. was following the same course of action?What course of action is that? Making a plea agreement while critical information is being withheld unethically, or honouring a legally binding agreement? What exactly would you propose Sleeper? That the Canadian government simply not let her out? How exactly would that work in a country of laws?
More importantly, do you think that the United States, or Great Britain, or France, or Germany, the Netherlands, etc., are any different?