Judge orders Beltline rapist locked up indefinitely

[jolinar of malkshor]

Park noted that little is known about Delaa's background before he arrived illegally in Canada from Algeria in 1997, and that the 41-year-old has shown a pattern of violence toward both men and women.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/sto...ne-rapist.html

Can someone please tell me why this scum bag is still in Canada? This waste of skin should have been sent back in 1999 yet our lovely immigration system lets him stay. I am getting so sick and tired of our useless justice/immigration system in Canada.

This isn't going to change until we citizens demand change.

[Incinerator]

at least they're locking him up instead of giving him 2 years of probation + community service like every other rapist who pass thru the courts.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Incinerator

at least they're locking him up instead of giving him 2 years of probation + community service like every other rapist who pass thru the courts.

Why are you and I paying for this scum bag to be locked up when he should have been sent back long time ago, before he raped this last two victims.

[Juventus3]

Judges can make indefinite sentences? Wtf don't they do that all the time...

I do agree in this case he should be exported back to where he came from.

[Devils'Advocate]

(A) The reason judges don't go throwing around the 'dangerous offender' provision is because the judge has to be absolutely sure that there is 0% chance of rehabilitation. Bernardo got it, obviously Karla did not.

(B) You can't deport someone into a country that won't take them. Going through a deportation hearing would be pointless given that his home country WILL NOT TAKE HIM. Oi. Oh, of course we could just airlift him and give him a parachute. But we could do that with all of our criminals. Save our taxpayers millions. Though I do believe that the receiving country MIGHT get a little upset about that. And the UN might be upset about us breaking international law. But, hey, small potatoes.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

(A) The reason judges don't go throwing around the 'dangerous offender' provision is because the judge has to be absolutely sure that there is 0% chance of rehabilitation. Bernardo got it, obviously Karla did not.

However, the judge should have had a right to apply the dangerous offender to Holmolka after the video tapes were discovered, to me thats a huge hole in our justice system.

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

(B) You can't deport someone into a country that won't take them. Going through a deportation hearing would be pointless given that his home country of Laos WILL NOT TAKE HIM. Oi. Oh, of course we could just airlift him and give him a parachute. But we could do that with all of our criminals. Save our taxpayers millions. Though I do believe that Laos MIGHT get a little upset about that. And the UN might be upset about us breaking international law. But, hey, small potatoes.

Should be irrelevant, he's not a Canadian Citizen since he entered Canada illegally. As he also entered the country illegally and didn't attempt to gain citizenship he's not protected by any international law that I can think of. Canada can legally throw him on a plan home, deplane him at the airport and let his home country do what they will.

Because a country refuses to take back one of their citizens doesn't mean that we're obligated to accept him of protect him.

Personally I don't give a crap if we send him back and his home country shoots him.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Because a country refuses to take back one of their citizens doesn't mean that we're obligated to accept him of protect him. Personally I don't give a crap if we send him back and his home country shoots him.

This isn't about protecting him from 3rd world laws. We WOULD deport him if we could.

From a Kevin Martin Sun article from before the judge declared dangerous offender:

Pat Gorman, a parole officer with Correctional Service Canada, testified he has one client who is walking Calgary streets because his native country of Laos won't have him. "The big thing about deportation is whether the receiving country is co-operating," Gorman told Delaa's dangerous offender hearing, "If the receiving country is not co-operating ... they can remain here indefinitely."

I'm not surprised that the right wingers would blame the government for not doing something it CANNOT DO.

[FlamesAddiction]

It's better that he's locked up in Canada than walking free in Algeria. It's too bad it took so long, but it may have taken even longer in Algeria.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

This isn't about protecting him from 3rd world laws. We WOULD deport him if we could.

From a Kevin Martin Sun article from before the judge declared dangerous offender:


I'm not surprised that the right wingers would blame the government for not doing something it CANNOT DO.

I'm not blaming the government for anything here. Sadly in a lot of ways, we're a civilized country and this scumbag is being protected by a loop hole in the law larger then a semi truck. If we were smart, we'd start smuggling our worst criminals into Algeria and then refuse to take them back.

Hopefully this mf gets put in the general population, even though again, we're a civilized country and we'll make sure he's protected in prison so that he can get out and re-offend in the shortest time possible.

[/quote]It's better that he's locked up in Canada than walking free in Algeria. It's too bad it took so long, but it may have taken even longer in Algeria.[/quote]

Too bad we can't send a bill to Algeria for keeping this scumbag alive.





I think the refusal to take him back by Algeria is valid, however I believe that Canada only has an obligation to remove him from our soil and put him on a planeback there. Once he's off of our soil, we have no further obligation to take him back.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I'm not blaming the government for anything here. Sadly in a lot of ways, we're a civilized country and this scumbag is being protected by a loop hole in the law larger then a semi truck. If we were smart, we'd start smuggling our worst criminals into Algeria and then refuse to take them back.

Hell, Castro did it in the 80's, why can't we? Pull a Ralph Klein and buy all our foreign criminals (especially the insane ones) a plane ticket somewhere other than Canada.

And I'm only half kidding......it drives me nuts when we end up dealing with some other countries trash.

[burn_this_city]

Can't we just shoot people like this... Instead of wasting money locking him up or flying him home.. Just make him dig a hole in the prison cemetary and spend 25 cents on ammo.. At times I wish alberta was more like texas.. People like him don't deserve the air we breathe..

Edit: I realize what I said is a lil extreme but I'm growing tired of the lax justice system here.. It seems like judges have their hands tied the majority of the time, and you have to move heaven and earth to nail someone with a stiff sentence..

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Edit: I realize what I said is a lil extreme but I'm growing tired of the lax justice system here.. It seems like judges have their hands tied the majority of the time, and you have to move heaven and earth to nail someone with a stiff sentence..

Yeah. Only a "lil" extreme.

In this case the judge gave the man the stiffest sentence that Canada allows - jail - forever - until he is dead. And we have people here complaining that we were too lax on the guy. Personally, I think the judge was bang-on - though from the articles I read, the judge WAS trying to take into consideration the possibility a sentence plus deportation, but when he concluded that Algeria is NEVER going to want this guy back his only recourse was 'dangerous offenders' status.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Yeah. Only a "lil" extreme.

In this case the judge gave the man the stiffest sentence that Canada allows - jail - forever - until he is dead. And we have people here complaining that we were too lax on the guy. Personally, I think the judge was bang-on - though from the articles I read, the judge WAS trying to take into consideration the possibility a sentence plus deportation, but when he concluded that Algeria is NEVER going to want this guy back his only recourse was 'dangerous offenders' status.

Sorry, maybe I'm not as optimistic as you are. Just because he's been labeled as a dangerous offender, doesn't mean that he's going to be in jail forever. The courts in Canada are based around rehabilitation and quick releases. This guy will be back out of prison within the next 5 to 8 years with a maximum of 10. In fact he will probably be out quicker because some lawyer will take up the cause of cruel and unusual punishment based around the dangerous offender label. There's a reason why its not used very often, and thats because it won't stand up in the Canadian court systems.

The most disgusting monsters always get released from Canadian jails. Get placed back on the streets and then re-offend, then we have the "our bad" moment.

Algeria's refusal to take this guy back, who shouldn't have been here in the first place constitutes a pretty clear danger to actual Canadian's. Hopefully the foreign affairs department finds a way to force this guy out of the country. There also needs to be an investigation on why this guy wasn't denied entry when he got here.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

(B) You can't deport someone into a country that won't take them. Going through a deportation hearing would be pointless given that his home country WILL NOT TAKE HIM. Oi. Oh, of course we could just airlift him and give him a parachute. But we could do that with all of our criminals. Save our taxpayers millions. Though I do believe that the receiving country MIGHT get a little upset about that. And the UN might be upset about us breaking international law. But, hey, small potatoes.

How do you know what kind of proceedings have taken place with regards to the removal of this individual? You don't so how can you make a statement that the country won't take him back? That judge was not an Immigration adjudicator. Most judeges no diddly squat about immigration law. If the government had the motivation they COULD send this guy back. Like I said before there are MANY aggreements in place.

Even if the person is stateless there are many agreements in place with many countries and the UN that allows the removal of illegal people to certain countries. No one said lets float them out the airplane door. You are making an arguement where there isn't one.

You say you are not suprised that the right would blame this on the government. IT IS the governments fault for not having a working immigration system in place. If this person was dealt with when he committed his first crime he would have been long gone and unable to commit his second and third crime.