BS: robert latimer

Subject: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 08:29 PM

Here's a great Canadian hero. A man who refused to "show remorse" for acts of decency and kindness. He should be given an Order of Canada, but instead will be thrown back behind bars. Galileo chickened out, but he did not.

Meanwhile the torturers are given medals.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bobad
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 08:34 PM

Couldn't agree with you more john, a true man of principle who has the courage of his convictions, I applaud him.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: artbrooks
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 08:35 PM

There is no simple answer in cases of "mercy killing", but (IMHO) ten years in jail is enough.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bobad
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 08:39 PM

Robert Latimer's story for those who haven't heard it.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Steve Latimer
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 09:43 PM

I'm not sure that I would call him a hero. I can sympathize with him though. I agree with Art though, ten years is enough.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 10:31 PM

Thanks for the link, bobad.

What a terrible situation. Ten years does seem like too much in light of the original sentence and the agreement of the judge. Sounds like the law really needs an adjustment.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Peace
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 10:38 PM

I though the following important enough to reproduce it entirely.

"Robert Latimer timeline
CanWest News Service
Published: Wednesday, December 05, 2007

A timeline of Robert Latimer's journey through the court system:

-- Oct. 21, 1993: Latimer kills his 12-year-old daughter Tracy at the family farm in Wilkie, Sask.

-- Nov. 16, 1994: He is convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison with no eligibility for parole for 10 years.

-- July 18, 1995: Loses first appeal in Saskatchewan court.

-- Oct. 25, 1995: Information appears that the RCMP might have interfered with potential jurors, on Crown orders, by asking them about their beliefs on religion, abortion and mercy killing.

-- Feb. 6, 1997: Supreme Court orders a new trial.

-- Nov. 5, 1997: Latimer found guilty of second-degree murder.

-- Dec. 1, 1997: A Saskatchewan court judge exempts Latimer from the minimum sentence, instead imposing one year in jail and one served in the community.

-- Nov. 23, 1998: Saskatchewan Court of Appeal sets aside the exemption and reinstates a mandatory life sentence.

-- Feb., 1999: Latimer appeals to the Supreme Court of Canada.

-- Jan. 18, 2001: Supreme Court upholds Latimer's life sentence, with no chance of parole for 10 years. Latimer reports to prison.

-- Dec. 5, 2007: A national parole board denies Latimer's bid for day parole.

-- Dec. 8, 2009: The parole board will be legally obligated to hear another day parole request by Latimer if one is made.

-- Dec. 8, 2010: Latimer is eligible for full parole."

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Peace
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 10:44 PM

As for a 'justice system' in need of some serious revamping, it seems these people (presumably mostly Canadian) would agree.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 11:00 PM

I don't know if there is a wrong here. Obviously the courts think differently.

Mr Latimer must have spend a long time arriving at his decision. One, knowing he was going to be brought up on murder charges. Two,willing to make the sacrifice of spending time in jail. God help anyone who has is in this dilemma.
Beer (adrien)

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 05 Dec 07 - 11:04 PM

Scratch (has) off. Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 01:06 AM

A jury of his peers believed they were giving him a sentence of just a year. The life sentence was substituted by Appeals Court judges.

A few days ago, he could have had virtual freedom, if only he had lied (as so many would in the circumstances)! He might have expressed false remorse, but he stood by his actions.

He will now be given therapy. Presumably courage is not normal, and must be cured.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: topical tom
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 12:13 PM

I wouldn't classify him as a hero, just someone who ended the suffering of a loved one. Don't we all wish we could do so at times?What pisses me off is that people who have committed other murders far less noble are let off with the proverbial "slap on the wrist".I can mention vehicular homicide as one example though there are many others.Canada's justice system needs to be revised in many areas.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 02:49 PM

If not sympathy Latimer is at least deserving of empathy. To have gone through what this poor devil has could have been the fate of any of us.
Just because he won't grovel at the feet of the parole board and express remorse they refuse to let him out. I do not believe that he is a saint but neither is he a devil and he is no risk to anybody. 10 years was far and away too much! The National Parole Board releases murders and rapists every day after 1/3 of their sentence and almost always after 2/3 even though there remains great risk to the public. Often these criminals are serving multiple concurrent sentences but as long as they lie and kiss the collective arses of the parole board they walk. It is hard to find words to describe this decision, but the arseholes who made it should be fired!

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 03:02 PM

His child should have been put down at birth, by the medical system.
The whole business of keeping such children alive is a flaw in modern society.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 03:49 PM

I certainly don't agree with that Q. However, a parent in such circumstances is in a real bind. They cared for her lovingly for 12 years so they did their part. There is no easy answer, but justice should have been tempered with mercy in this case. It wasn't!

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 04:57 PM

Heeping a child like that alive is not mercy- it is punishment for both parents and child. Not to mention society as a whole who have to contribute facilities for support.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Peace
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 06:46 PM

There are some conditions that are not diagnosed with amniocentesis, nor are they visible at birth.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 07:04 PM

From that link bodad gave us :

Leading advocates for the disabled, who argued Mr. Latimer put vulnerable Canadians at risk by dehumanizing the handicapped, didn't oppose his early release.

However, Jim Derksen, of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities, said his association will continue to fight the "unjust and unfair portrayal" of Tracy Latimer.

"Her father, the murderer, was portrayed as a victim," he said yesterday, before the parole decision. "Some people were willing to agree his daughter's life was not worth living - it's extremely dangerous to vulnerable people with disabilities."

That seems to sum it up pretty well. And the fact that there are people around capable of writing stuff like "His child should have been put down at birth, by the medical system..." sets it in context. "Put down..."

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 06 Dec 07 - 08:50 PM

McGrath:

Huh?

I've just been watching several advocates for the disabled (on TV) clearly arguing against Latimer's early release, in no uncertain terms!

The main argument is that they do not wish to be seen as "second class citizens". Apparently they prefer to be seen as petty, vindictive and unjust.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Mooh
Date: 07 Dec 07 - 10:55 AM

It bewilders me that disabled persons groups don't seem to see that they are not the same as Tracy. The poor child had no quality of life, no potential of growth beyond her somewhat miserable existance, no escape from the pain. Health care of the time was not going to change anything for her, nor has it gained the ability for others in the intervening years. To put themselves in the same boat as Tracy does themselves a disservice. They are not threatened by anything RL did. There has not been any rush to rid society of the disabled, maybe even the opposite has happened, though not because of RL. It seems they are trying to make RL their whipping boy.

Who knows what a person is capable of doing in the worst of circumstances? Robert Latimer didn't kill his daughter for selfish reasons, empowerment, uncontrolled aggression, to hide another crime, or mental illness. He killed his daughter out of desperation, compassion, fatalistic love, and lost hope. Comparing him to, punishing him and characterizing him as a common murderer is just wrong. The law needs room for such acts.

He is not a hero nor his crime heroic, just a tragic figure caught in a system that won't recognize him as he is. He should be freed.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Dec 07 - 02:23 PM

There has not been any rush to rid society of the disabled. Not since Hitler made that kind of thing too embarrassing, even for those "progressively minded" people in democratic countries who'd favoured "eugenic policies".

Or rather, the "rush to rid society of the disabled" has moved to pre-birth rather than post-birth.

I don't think it's the least bit surprising that people with severe disabilities should feel at risk, or that in some cases, in the kind of society they live in with its taste for vengeance, that should express itself in that way.

But I quite agree with Mooh's last bit - punishment is no more appropriate in this tragic case than adulation.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 07 Dec 07 - 03:12 PM

Well said Mooh

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 07 Dec 07 - 03:39 PM

There's been a wide range of opinion here, since I started this thread.

But not THAT wide; I don't see a lot of folks calling for "lock him up and throw away the key!".

However, that seems to be what may actually happen; if he can't get day parole, why would he get parole at all, ever? Chances are, he will spend his life in prison.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 07 Dec 07 - 04:29 PM

Want to start a petition John? You put the wording together and we could send it through our e-mail contacts here in Canada or else where, but I think it would have to be Canada for it to be more attentive (effective) due to the fact that this particular situation is here. The wording would be very important.
Beer (adrien)

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 07 Dec 07 - 07:30 PM

Thanks, Beer. I wish there was a mechanism to get Robert Latimer out of jail.

I cannot do petitions, and I would not start one, or sign one if started by someone else.
A personal problem, perhaps, but I have to agree with every word I put my name to, and I have only signed petitions twice in my life; one was only five words long.

Besides, the case went beyond public scrutiny; the parole board is not supposed to respond to the world outside.

Sorry; at this stage I'm a bit baffled as to what to do.

Perhaps we can't help Robert Latimer, but only make things easier for the next people, facing future problems...

...JFW

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 07 Dec 07 - 07:37 PM

no problem. I understand.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: gnu
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 08:01 AM

Beer... "Well said Mooh"

Indeed!

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: GUEST,Willie-O
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 10:19 AM

"Perhaps we can't help Robert [Tracy] Latimer, but only make things easier for the next people, facing future problems..."

That's what the advocates for his continued imprisonment say too, referring to Tracy.

I don't see Latimer as a hero or a candidate for the Order of Canada, but I understand why he felt he had to--let's not mince words--kill his daughter. I understand his feelings but still think it was wrong, and the kind of action that our laws should strongly discourage.

That being said, there is no doubt that he has done serious time. There's no apparent risk to society that he will reoffend. And the reasons for denying him parole at this time are into the realm of "thought crime". That bothers me at least as much as the crime he committed. The parole board should act humanely and recognize the unique circumstances, and let him return to his family, who still need him.

He's done his time. "Life" does not really mean life in Canada (I am okay with that by the way) for the vast majority of those who are sentenced to serve it, and should not in this case.

W-O

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Raptor
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 10:37 AM

I'm sorry people but I thought the bible said "Tho shalt NOT kill"

And I didn't know that Robbie Latimer was a doctor or in any kind of medical training to decide tracy should have been put down.

And I didn't know that the laws in canada state that Murder is OK with the best of intentions

And I wasn't aware that we, who speculate on the cat are better informed than the people who sat in the courtroom and heard firsthand what actualy happened, Based on the compleatly unbiased media.

Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Raptor
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 10:41 AM

Lets change the law to state Murder is OK if you don't like the quality of life of the victoms.

Mabey thats why god hits trailer parks with tornadoes.

Raptor

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bobad
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 10:47 AM

"but still think it was wrong"

Did you consider the alternative to killing her? The remainder of Tracy's life would have been spent in a constant state of intractable and excruciating pain. Would you be prepared to maintain a life in such circumstances and if so to what purpose? Our society does not tolerate such behaviour towards animals yet punishes the same act of compassion when it is directed towards a human being.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 10:54 AM

Raptor...

The people who sat in the courtroom asked for a one-year sentence, maximum.

The Bible says "Thou shalt not kill", but in the same book (Exodus) orders us to kill witches, homosexuals, and those who let their oxen run free. Perhaps we should make different choices?

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: GUEST,Obie
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 11:02 AM

Raptor said; "And I wasn't aware that we, who speculate on the cat are better informed than the people who sat in the courtroom and heard firsthand what actualy happened."
A jury of twelve of his peers found him guilty but with extenuating circumstances and recommended that his sentence not exceed ONE year.
The judge agreed and he was to serve a confinement of a year ( and be on probation for the rest of his life). The crown appealed and a panel of judges, not a jury, changed the sentence to 10 years minimum. He has served the 10 years quietly without complaint. Now a few ignoramuses on the National Parole Board are not satisfied that he feels remorse, so have refused him parole. That is why there is indignation throughout this land.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 01:31 PM

We excoriate the hide-bound beliefs of the Taliban Pushtun, but the equally hidebound reasoning of a raptor pervades our own society.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 02:29 PM

How about "Do unto others as you would be done by." Which Kant tell us is the same as the categorical imperative, and utilitarians see as being close to their own philosophy. In other words, an intuitive concept of goodness which preceeds the Bible.

Here's my living will:

riding the iceberg

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bankley
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 04:10 PM

Dennis Lakusta wrote a song called 'Tracy's Lullabye'. I helped him record it on his debut 'Run with You' CD /'97... Robert liked it..

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bobad
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 04:20 PM

Nice one John, I'll be waving to you from the next iceberg over.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 05:12 PM

Was lisrening to it a few night ago. Great song

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Charley Noble
Date: 08 Dec 07 - 09:09 PM

Robert Latimer deserves my support, and the Appeals Court sentence makes no sense to me. There certainly was no criminal intent in this father's action, no possible gain except the relief from the pain of watching one's off-spring suffer.

Still, it's not a decision that anyone should take lightly, and I'm sure there are a range of cases where my verdict would not be so clear-cut.

I sometimes envy people who feel that the Bible will guide them in cases such as this. I sincerely doubt it but others on this forum are problably better informed.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bankley
Date: 09 Dec 07 - 08:15 AM

Beer, didn't know that you had a copy. They're getting rare.. There's some good ones on there.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bobad
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 06:36 PM

Appeal board overturns Robert Latimer's parole denial.

Story

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 27 Feb 08 - 06:42 PM

Thanks for the up date bobad. Very good news for him indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 05:18 PM

Our parole board should all be fired! They release dangerous criminals every day but keep less dangerous offenders locked up because they won't kiss their collective arses.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 05:20 PM

Sorry, I should read my own posts as I already expressed my opinion. :-}

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Beer
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 05:38 PM

Still good to hear it.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 06:16 PM

Good to hear, but what do they mean by "day parole?" Does he have to report into the halfway house at the end of each day and stay there?

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: bobad
Date: 28 Feb 08 - 07:36 PM

"Day Parole" means the authority granted to an offender by the board or a provincial parole board to be at large during the offender's term of imprisonment in order to prepare the offender for a full parole or statutory release, the conditions of which require the offender to return to a penitentiary, a community-based residential facility or a provincial correctional facility each night, unless otherwise authorized in writing.

This definition is more precise:

    * it has a purpose: "in order to prepare the offender for full parole or statutory release;
    * it defines the leeway for mobility: "to return to a penitentiary, a community-based residential facility or a provincial correctional facility each night, unless otherwise authorised in writing;"
    * it limits eligibility to six months before full parole eligibility date; and
    * it removes the automatic review provision -- the evaluation had shown that the requirements in Bill C-67 could not be met in both spirit and letter.

http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pblct/forum/e102/e102b-eng.shtml

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: john f weldon
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 05:44 PM

Good news. I would have missed this development, but for Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Mooh
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 07:50 PM

I stand by my previous stated opinion, but I will add that one of the reasons we have checks and balances in the judicial system, juries, parole boards, appeals and the like, is to accommodate unusual individuals, scenerios, and situations like that of Tracy and Robert Latimer. That it seemingly hickupped for RL is just proof that no system is perfect.

There are more songs to be sung, I suspect.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: robert latimer
From: Charley Noble
Date: 29 Feb 08 - 09:24 PM

I'm actually surprised that the Appeals Board elected to release Latimer. It makes sense to me but I'm a minority of a minority on this issue. I generally think that prison is the place of last resort when it comes to dealing with criminal acts. It's also a tremendously expensive option.

I only make exceptions when it comes to the case of an occasional demonic President such as George W. Bush and his evil Vice President Dick Cheney; they should both be locked up for their crimes against humanity, and the keys thrown away.

I hope some self-righteous defender of life doesn't decide now that he has to assassinate Mr. Latimer. Then, we'll really have a quandary about what to do with him or her.

Charley Noble