Thursday, December 20, 2007

"I don't think I'll call him daddy anymore"

Just a four year sentence - for this????


Friday Update: Post - Father who abused daughter, live on the Internet, gets four years.


This one is very revealing - 'Disgusting' sentence for abusive father.

Paul Gillespie, the chief executive of Kids Internet Safety Alliance, said the sentence should have been closer to 10 to 20 years, not four.

"I think this sentence is absolutely disgusting," he said. "The fact that in the real time he will probably be out of custody in less than 12 months is something that even by Canadian standards is absolutely disgraceful."



CBC - 4-year sentence for online sexual abuser a 'slap on the wrist': Tory.

TABaker - Not enough.

Unambig - 34 Months In Jail For Raping His Daughter Live On Internet?

Christie Blatchford - Child Porn. Why don't the punishments fit the crime? Via Dr. Roy.

11 comments:

liberal supporter said...

I think it is plenty of time.

Unlike a high profile prisoner like Paul Bernardo, this guy is unknown. They won't be able to keep him in protective custody for long.

He'll be dead in less than four years.

bigcitylib said...

Does seem a bit weak, doesn't it?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

They won't be able to keep him in protective custody for long.

An expert on CTV just said he likely will be segregated from the rest of the prison population for his own protection. Wouldn't want poor daddy to get abused after all.

It sickens me.

BCL - If a Liberal is saying that, then it really is too lenient!

lanarklady said...

I do not understand why the courts do not love our children . As a mom of three my heart breaks and my mind rages at this crime. The penalty is not enough WHY WHY WHY!

Anonymous said...

you conservatives depress me. when this world falls apart from hatred and separatism- it will be your fault.

Anonymous said...

The part that bothers me, and I can understand about protecting the child - he remains unknown to us.

The sentence was disgusting. The little girl is scarred for life and he's free in a few years - fair? I don't think so.

(and I'm a Liberal)

valiantmauz said...

And of the four years he'll only serve 20 months, in addition to the 14 he's spent waiting for the trial. A grand total slightly under three years. And three years of "probation", whatever the hell that means.

Far, far too little.

aek said...

Justice John McGarry states:

"The victim will have this cloud over her head for the rest of her life. . .The images will always be out there,'' he said.

"Words cannot describe what is found in those pictures. They are of a three- and four-year-old girl being used by her father for his own sexual gratification.''

And for this, Justice McGarry metes out a four year sentence?

Worse still, this "four year" sentence means the father will serve just another 20 months in jail, having already served 14 months.

i.e. he gets double time knocked off his sentence for time already served.(20+14 does not equal 48).

His daughter will be six or seven years old when he is back on the streets, completely "re-habilitated" no doubt...

Why is our justice system so lax on violent criminals?

liberal supporter said...

An expert on CTV just said he likely will be segregated from the rest of the prison population for his own protection. Wouldn't want poor daddy to get abused after all.

Yes, but unlike Bernardo, he is not well publicized or recognized. He will be "accidentally" allowed into the general population by a guard who "didn't realize who he was" and it was "all a mistake". Of course his executioner will have been chosen the day he arrives there.

It will happen before he gets a chance to get out. Or the day he gets out.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

He will be "accidentally" allowed into the general population by a guard who "didn't realize who he was" and it was "all a mistake".

Is this wishful thinking on your part, L.S.?

Are you an advocate of vigilantism? Personally, I prefer a democratic approach. Tougher laws; tougher sentences.

Brian in Calgary said...

i.e. he gets double time knocked off his sentence for time already served.

This is the second most idiotic aspect of our "justice" system. The absolute most idiotic aspect is the tendancy of judges to give crappy sentences like this. I agree with Paul Gillespie: He should have gotten a bare minimum of 10 years.