As many of you know, I have concerns about Canada's justice system. It really does seem it's stacked in favour of the criminal. The mindset of factoring compassion and considering the environment for crimes - though should be considered - has seemingly reached its unacceptable apex. When you have a legal system that permits one of the most notorious murderers in "the history of North America walk free on a plea bargain in exchange for information, you know we're on the wrong track. No?
Enter Aset Magomadova. Magomadova strangled her14 year old daughter with a scarf for over two minutes and was not given any jail time. Oh, she has "strict restrictions and conditions" she must follow but no prison term for her crime.
She's murdered her daughter. Sure, she may not have "intended" for it to happen but she finished the job in the end and for that she must face jail time. I understand sometimes details to a case deem we go easy on some people but no jail time?
Meanwhile, guys like Richard Latimer who present far more plausible cases of compassion languishes in a half-way house after having spent time in jail.
Judge Sal LoVecchio has a bizarre view on things.
Of the Commonwealth countries and the U.S., only the U.S. and possibly Australia, remain tough on crime. The UK and Canada have become weak. Specious perhaps but it's a perception. Either we truly are progressive or we've lost all sense of justice and confuse compassion and crime.
***
Which makes me ask: When a judge makes a controversial decision should they explain themselves to the public outside the realm of the court?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.