Was Canada right to grant asylum to a U.S. sex offender?

[Dion]

Is it the Canadian government, which has granted the convicted U.S. sex offender (Denise Harvey) protected-person status after a lengthy review by the Immigration Refugee Board and the Federal Court?

Or is it the Florida justice system, which sentenced the Vero Beach mortgage broker to 30 years in prison for having consensual sex with a 16-year-old boy who played on her son's baseball team?

Her problems began when she was convicted in 2008 of five counts of having sex with a minor, a boy whom she met at her son's baseball practices, the National Post said.

The judge jailed her for 30 years, a sentence upheld despite two appeals. But before she could be taken into custody, Harvey, who had always asserted her innocence, fled to Canada with her husband and son in 2009.

The family settled in Pike Lake, Sask., near Saskatoon, but Harvey was arrested by the RCMP in 2011, triggering her refugee claim.

Ordinarily, extradition in cases like this are just a matter of time, but Harvey had a key fact on her side. Besides the argument that 30-year sentence was heavy handed, the acts of which Harvey was convicted are not a crime in Canada.

As in Canada, many U.S. states do not bar consensual sex between 16-year-olds and adults, and where it is a crime the punishments frequently are light.

"The 30-year sentence handed down was a shock," TCPalm observed. "If the sentencing judge's hands were tied according to law, then the law needs to be reformed to comply a little more with common sense, the severity of the crime and the threat to society.

"Thirty years? Some murderers don't get that much time."

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...202822436.html

[skudr248]

Fled with her husband? Oh god, some guy's today I just don't understand... that #### is just sick, and how this dude stuck with her after this is beyond stupid to me

[puckluck2]

Meh he was 16 not like he was some poor kid who is emotionally scarred. At 16 I would have banged her too.

[GGG]

16, not in a power relationship like teacher student so it seems consenual.

Definately not worth 30 years in prison so I agree with the refugee claim.

[fatso]

Plus the claimant is white and female, so the whole thing is more palatable. I approve!

[Thor]

30 years is ridiculous.

[Devils'Advocate]

Just to play, uhm, devils advocate for a second.... Would we feel the same way if it were an adult male and a 16 year old girl?

I think the laws in Canada does not prohibit such relationships unless there is a "position of authority" issue - teacher, coach, etc..

[Thor]

Morally wrong, legally no I feel the same way if it was reversed.

[StrykerSteve]

30 years for consensual sex is ridiculous.

[Devils'Advocate]

So where is the cut off? Is 16 when someone is old enough to make an informed decision about sex? Why not 15? 14? Why 16?

At what point does it go from "statutory rape" to "a-okay by me"?

[Thor]

I'd say its impossible to pick an age, 16 seems fine as a line that the Judge can then make a decision based on other factors in each specific case.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

So where is the cut off? Is 16 when someone is old enough to make an informed decision about sex? Why not 15? 14? Why 16?

At what point does it go from "statutory rape" to "a-okay by me"?

The law was recently changed in Canada. Ten years ago 14 and 15 were allowed. Now the law is 16.

Whether I agree with the relationship or not isn't relevant to me approving of the asylum status. I want my country to grant asylum to any body convicted of a crime in their country; where that is not a crime in Canada. For example, if a woman in the middle east is convicted of not covering her head or something else, I would want her to have a recourse.

[Baxter Renegade]

The U.S. lets people like OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony walk, yet this lady gets 30 years?

I'm good with granting her asylum.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The law was recently changed in Canada. Ten years ago 14 and 15 were allowed. Now the law is 16.

Whether I agree with the relationship or not isn't relevant to me approving of the asylum status. I want my country to grant asylum to any body convicted of a crime in their country; where that is not a crime in Canada. For example, if a woman in the middle east is convicted of not covering her head or something else, I would want her to have a recourse.

The other aspect is the sentance aspect. Even if this was stat rape in Canada is 30 years a reasonable sentance and in the interests of Justice. We would grant refugee status if someone was charge with theft and would have their hand cut off and we don't extradite if the accused would face the death penalty.

So even without it being legal in Canada it would be an interesting case where I think the punishment does not fit the crime. Though I don't know where that line would be.

[puffnstuff]

30 years is a little steep.

That said, I'm not gonna ask her to babysit my kids anytime soon.

[Cuz]

I guess I'll be going against the grain here and say that I do not agree with granting her asylum status.

Personally, I do not believe someone should receive asylum status simply because it is not a crime in Canada, nor should it be granted because of an absolutely ridiculous sentence (30 years for this is way over the top), rather asylum status should be saved for those who are truly persecuted. She should have known or ought to have known this was illegal in Florida. Is this silly to have as a law between two consenting persons past the age of consent? Yes, I think so, but I do not believe she can claim to be persecuted because of this.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Cuz

I guess I'll be going against the grain here and say that I do not agree with granting her asylum status.

Personally, I do not believe someone should receive asylum status simply because it is not a crime in Canada, nor should it be granted because of an absolutely ridiculous sentence (30 years for this is way over the top), rather asylum status should be saved for those who are truly persecuted. She should have known or ought to have known this was illegal in Florida. Is this silly to have as a law between two consenting persons past the age of consent? Yes, I think so, but I do not believe she can claim to be persecuted because of this.

I don't think she is getting asylum because she is being persecuted, she is getting asylum because her punishment is likely considered cruel given the crime she comitted.

What if it was the death penalty instead of 30 years in prison? Would that change your opinion. She is 30 now would get out when she is 60 so its like a half death penalty, and she would lose the good half. At some point a punishment becomes unjust and we shouldn't subject a person to it.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't think she is getting asylum because she is being persecuted, she is getting asylum because her punishment is likely considered cruel given the crime she comitted.

What if it was the death penalty instead of 30 years in prison? Would that change your opinion. She is 30 now would get out when she is 60 so its like a half death penalty, and she would lose the good half. At some point a punishment becomes unjust and we shouldn't subject a person to it.

She's 47 years old and would likely die in prison.

[undercoverbrother]

I struggle with this type of thing.

To me this is still sexual predation. I find the age gap disgusting and say what you want these are not two individuals in the same mental space.

From the article:

Florida law makes it illegal for anyone over the age of 24 to have sex with someone 16 or younger, the Post noted. The age of consent in Canada is 16, unless the older person is in a position of trust or authority (such as a teacher or coach), when the age of consent rises to 18.

I actually like the concept of the age of consent on a sliding scale.

I agree, that 30 yrs is too much, but again I struggle with this because of my views on this type of incident/crime.

On a side note, I am not sure this is the type of person I want in Canada. It appears she has an odd moral compass.

[Cuz]

Originally Posted by GGG

I don't think she is getting asylum because she is being persecuted, she is getting asylum because her punishment is likely considered cruel given the crime she comitted.

What if it was the death penalty instead of 30 years in prison? Would that change your opinion. She is 30 now would get out when she is 60 so its like a half death penalty, and she would lose the good half. At some point a punishment becomes unjust and we shouldn't subject a person to it.

I agree, the punishment for the crime is unjust. However, I am concerned about the precedent that this ruling sets for other potential fugitives seeking asylum in Canada because of what a fugitive perceives as an unjust punishment. Some penalties in the US for simple drug possession are unjust, but do we really want to protect those that break a law in the US because we believe the punishment to be too harsh for the crime? At best we would be ignoring the extradition treaty we have in place with the US, at worst we are infringing on her sovereignty.