Disgusted doesn't even begin to describe my feelings after reading this story.
Karla Homolka took part in a series of revolting sex crimes against young teenage girls, including one against her sister, and yet, the powers-that-be in Canada feel that the restrictions put on her after she completed her 12-year sentence (12 years???) needed to be removed.
Let's recap Homolka's crimes:
The judge who ruled in her favor states that while it is possible Homolka can repeat her crimes, she doesn't represent "a real and imminent danger."
From what I can gather from Canadian press, there are 12 years worth of conflicting assessments by parole board officers, psychologists, and experts. This judge apparently decided to give her positive assessments the benefit of the doubt. Way to go, brother.
There has always been a debate in this country about whether or not the restrictions associated with Megan's Law placed on sex offenders are a violation of their privacy. Studies regarding the "curability" and psychology of sex offenders are inconclusive, but it's fair to say that there is no magic pill involved that will remove such high-risk impulses and reduce recidivism. Treatment and therapy is available, but you don't just lose the desire to commit such acts by sitting in jail for 12 years. No one has argued that Homolka sought out any treatment while in prison. Nor has she sought out the treatment after being released. And treatment takes time, effort, and a lot of support. Support that she probably doesn't have.
There's a good reason many states have enacted Megan's Law. The law isn't perfect, but it's there for a specific purpose. Ideally, it should strike a good balance between public safety and the offenders' rights. But Homolka didn't just commit one crime; she took part in at least 4, and in my book, she's likely to do it again. And if I lived in Canada, I would be afraid.
Karla Homolka took part in a series of revolting sex crimes against young teenage girls, including one against her sister, and yet, the powers-that-be in Canada feel that the restrictions put on her after she completed her 12-year sentence (12 years???) needed to be removed.
Let's recap Homolka's crimes:
- in 1990, she held a drug-soaked cloth over her 15 year-old sister's face while her husband raped her. Tammy subsequently died on Christmas Eve.
- in the early 1990s, she helped her husband rape, murder, and dismember two teenage girls: 15 year-old Kristen French and 14 year-old Lesley Mahaffy.
- Months after her plea bargain, her now ex-husband's attorney handed over home videotapes showing Homolka as a willing and gleeful participant in the crimes mentioned above, plus a sexual assuault on an annonymous teenager ("Jane Doe").
The judge who ruled in her favor states that while it is possible Homolka can repeat her crimes, she doesn't represent "a real and imminent danger."
From what I can gather from Canadian press, there are 12 years worth of conflicting assessments by parole board officers, psychologists, and experts. This judge apparently decided to give her positive assessments the benefit of the doubt. Way to go, brother.
There has always been a debate in this country about whether or not the restrictions associated with Megan's Law placed on sex offenders are a violation of their privacy. Studies regarding the "curability" and psychology of sex offenders are inconclusive, but it's fair to say that there is no magic pill involved that will remove such high-risk impulses and reduce recidivism. Treatment and therapy is available, but you don't just lose the desire to commit such acts by sitting in jail for 12 years. No one has argued that Homolka sought out any treatment while in prison. Nor has she sought out the treatment after being released. And treatment takes time, effort, and a lot of support. Support that she probably doesn't have.
There's a good reason many states have enacted Megan's Law. The law isn't perfect, but it's there for a specific purpose. Ideally, it should strike a good balance between public safety and the offenders' rights. But Homolka didn't just commit one crime; she took part in at least 4, and in my book, she's likely to do it again. And if I lived in Canada, I would be afraid.
posted by elanit | 10:17 AM
2 Comments:
WARNING, this is graphic:
I am so glad someone else knows about this. I watch a lot of gross TV and this was by FAR the grossest thing I've ever seen; it upset me so much I couldn't sleep.
To give your readers an even better feel for who we're dealing with, let me tell you about one of the videos siezed by the police. First, know that she offered raping her sister as a birthday present to her then-boyfriend. The video -- filmed a couple of months after the rape/death of her baby sister -- showed Karla in her dead sister's clothes, hair tied up like a pre-teen's, pretending to be her sister to turn on her husband. The video turned sexual after this role play.
I was repulsed that Karla gets to be free after 12 years. Life in prison would be generous, in my opinion.
The Canadian authorities justified her parole because her defense attys. argued that as a lone woman, Karla is as Canadian as maple syrup and a great old gal. But somehow, when in the presence of her ex-husband, she became intimidated and morphed into a monster who gleefully offered her sister as a sexual sacrifice. But without the ex, she's totally normal! Please.
That defense doesn't really deserve a retort, but here's one anyway: There is someone out there as charismatic as her ex who could unleash her dark side. And even if there isn't, she has committed crimes that have denied her the right to live as a free woman.
Let's not forget that we wouldn't even be having this conversation if this were a male perpetrator.
Human courts can be stupid, but I believe in divine retribution, and this woman has a special seat waiting in hell for her.
What she said.
Post a Comment
<< Home