Humanity has risen!
SasqWatch
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/0...hildren-will-be-released-on-bail-judge-rules/
There has seldom be a case where the use of mental impairment as a defense has generated so much controversy, at least in Canada.
As the news article explains, a cardiologist discovers his wife is cheating on him with a close friend, and goes in utter despair. He decided to commit suicide by drinking a windshield washing solution, and he kills his two children at knife point on that fateful evening. Later, he will say on his trial that his mental capacities were impaired and in his warped state of mind, he wanted to take his children with him so they wouldn't have to suffer his death. The prosecution instead argued that Turcotte had premeditated the murder and wanted to take his children with him out of spite for his ex-wife's betrayal. He was acquitted because the jury found him not criminally responsible and the evidence insufficient to prove his acts were premeditated. Another judge ordered a new trial which will occur in a short future due to thinking that the last judge has inadvertently mislead the jury.
I do think it's absolutely ridiculous that a child killer gets to find his freedom back so early, although according to the law, social prejudices against a convicted criminal must not conflict with his right to be free when he doesn't post a threat to society and has otherwise been acquitted and deemed mentally fit. It is a case where individual liberties are in conflict with the "greater good" or with certain social notions of justices.
This case does raise interesting questions as to what the mental impairment defense should be, and where the line should be drawn.
SAINT-JEROME, Que. — A former Quebec doctor who admitted to stabbing his two children to death has been granted bail.
A judge ruled this morning that Guy Turcotte should be freed pending his new first-degree murder trial next year.
A jury found Turcotte not criminally responsible in 2011 and he was released from a psychiatric institution in December 2012. The Quebec Court of Appeal overturned the verdict last November, citing errors by the trial judge in his instructions to the jury.
The higher court ordered a new trial, leading to Turcotte’s re-arrest in late 2013.
Turcotte told the court during his bail hearing he should be freed because it is his right and that he could be of more use to society as a caregiver to some of his relatives instead of spending time in prison.
In granting bail, Quebec Superior Court Justice Andre Vincent said Turcotte does not represent a danger to society and is entitled to the presumption of innocence as he awaits the new proceedings.
Vincent did lay out several conditions for Turcotte, including keeping the peace, respecting a 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew, reporting to provincial police twice a month and continuing his psychiatric treatment.
He must also stay with his uncle, while his brother has to post a $100,000 bond. Turcotte is also prohibited from being within 100 metres of the residence of his former spouse, Isabelle Gaston, the mother of the slain children.
Vincent’s ruling angered Patrick Gaston, Isabelle’s brother.
Gaston stormed out of the courtroom when the bail decision was announced, heading straight to reporters to say he’s lost faith in the justice system.
“If you think I’m going to close my eyes or shut my mouth, today, no, I have no interest,” fumed Gaston, who was wearing a T-shirt bearing the photos of his late niece and nephew.
“Letting him go free … to the detriment of the families, the well-being of the victims, forget that,” he said. “We’re putting (first) the well-being of the accused killer, 47 stab wounds with a knife, I remind you.
“It’s perhaps spontaneous and a bit direct, what I’m telling you but … I don’t think a child killer should be allowed to walk the streets.”
The former physician stabbed his son, 5, and daughter, 3, 46 times at his Piedmont home as his marriage was falling apart, one night in February 2009. But he was found not criminally responsible at his murder trial, when a jury accepted his argument he could not recall the events and had experienced blackouts.
The controversial case made Turcotte a household name in Quebec and the verdict provoked a torrent of outrage.
There has seldom be a case where the use of mental impairment as a defense has generated so much controversy, at least in Canada.
As the news article explains, a cardiologist discovers his wife is cheating on him with a close friend, and goes in utter despair. He decided to commit suicide by drinking a windshield washing solution, and he kills his two children at knife point on that fateful evening. Later, he will say on his trial that his mental capacities were impaired and in his warped state of mind, he wanted to take his children with him so they wouldn't have to suffer his death. The prosecution instead argued that Turcotte had premeditated the murder and wanted to take his children with him out of spite for his ex-wife's betrayal. He was acquitted because the jury found him not criminally responsible and the evidence insufficient to prove his acts were premeditated. Another judge ordered a new trial which will occur in a short future due to thinking that the last judge has inadvertently mislead the jury.
I do think it's absolutely ridiculous that a child killer gets to find his freedom back so early, although according to the law, social prejudices against a convicted criminal must not conflict with his right to be free when he doesn't post a threat to society and has otherwise been acquitted and deemed mentally fit. It is a case where individual liberties are in conflict with the "greater good" or with certain social notions of justices.
This case does raise interesting questions as to what the mental impairment defense should be, and where the line should be drawn.