Four Mounties apparently killed near Mayerthorpe

[metallicat]

I was referring to the fact that someone mentioned most cops just consider it a job. I beg to differ with that comment, because I almost guarantee that most cops don't just consider it to be 'just another job', and would be willing to put their lives on the line to save another.

[Patek23]

Originally posted by oilers_fan@Mar 12 2005, 05:12 AM
I was referring to the fact that someone mentioned most cops just consider it a job. I beg to differ with that comment, because I almost guarantee that most cops don't just consider it to be 'just another job', and would be willing to put their lives on the line to save another.

Something I always ask cops wether it was a good occasion or a bad occasion was do you believe that you have to serve and protect or is it a just a job easily a good 75% claimed it to be just a job. And I believe them because they have no reason to lie because who are they going to believe when theres no evidence an average person or a cop, you'd be surprised what cops would tell you.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally posted by Flaming Homer@Mar 11 2005, 09:58 PM

And by your thinking someone who dies in a work related accident is a hero?

Being a victim of a work related MURDER, someone whose job is to protect society, and all four sound like that is what they were doing.

Also police officers generally do treat it as a job, but at the same time everyone generally realizes that their lives are on the line to protect society and that they are doing so in order to protect the general public. I don't see why it can't be both.

[chemgear]

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/01/15...for-day-parole

One of the men convicted in the slaying of four Mayerthorpe Mounties may now be eligible for day parole, according to reports.

Shawn Hennessey, who is serving a manslaughter sentence of 10 years and four months, will soon be able to apply for day parole privileges, CTV reported Sunday.

Hennessey began his sentence back in January 2009 after he and his brother-in-law, Dennis Cheeseman, each pleaded guilty to four counts of manslaughter for their roles in the fatal shootings of RCMP constables Brock Myrol, Peter Schiemann, Leo Johnston and Anthony Gordon.

[metallicat]

What bad memories this thread rekindles.

[Travis Munroe]

I am Speechless as I read your post Chemgear, what a joke.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

What bad memories this thread rekindles.

In more ways than one. The tragedy itself and the stupid posts in this thread.

[chemgear]

I remember seeing this when it originally aired ("Mr. Big" sting):

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2008-2009/co...age/video.html

In an exclusive interview, the fifth estate's Linden MacIntyre talks to one of the men recently convicted and sentenced in the deaths of four Mounties at Mayerthorpe, Alberta in March 2005. Shawn Hennessey's story has never been fully told, until now. On the eve of his plea to manslaughter charges, Hennessey sat down to talk to MacIntyre about the events leading to that fateful day, about James Roszko, and his own role in the tragic event.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by chemgear

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/01/15...for-day-parole

One of the men convicted in the slaying of four Mayerthorpe Mounties may now be eligible for day parole, according to reports.

Shawn Hennessey, who is serving a manslaughter sentence of 10 years and four months, will soon be able to apply for day parole privileges, CTV reported Sunday.

Hennessey began his sentence back in January 2009 after he and his brother-in-law, Dennis Cheeseman, each pleaded guilty to four counts of manslaughter for their roles in the fatal shootings of RCMP constables Brock Myrol, Peter Schiemann, Leo Johnston and Anthony Gordon.

There's no way that Hennessey should be getting anything this soon, the guy lied about everything that he could during the investigation and his family lied to cover things up. Basically he aided a cop killer and got two years for it.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...007/story.html

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

There's no way that Hennessey should be getting anything this soon, the guy lied about everything that I could during the investigation and his family lied to cover things up. Basically he aided a cop killer and got two years for it.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...007/story.html

I don't mean to dig up a whole ####storm, but what makes killing a cop worse than killing an average citizen?

[CaptainCrunch]

The cop killer was a label that was Rozko's crime right?, I had to apply something to it, whether it was a civilian or a cop or a case of regicide he shouldn't be getting day parole.

The guys a liar and a scum bag, and getting day parole within 3 years is ridiculous.

[Russic]

I could be wrong, but being eligible for day parole and being granted day parole are two rather different things.

[CaptainCrunch]

It is, I doubt he's going to get day parole, especially because of the victim's families ability to show up at the hearing and lay out their imapct statements.

If I remember they all indicated that they would

[comrade]

Here's a chapter that didn't make it into Joseph Heath's book Filthy Lucre. Just something I've read that may or may not apply to this case. I don't know much about this tragedy anymore.

http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~jheath/Oldch3.pdf

But while many liberals take things a bit too far, there is one important problem with the
conservative line. Punishment is not nearly as effective as most people are naturally disposed to
believe. This is why people who are actually in the punishment business are often quite sympathetic to
the liberal view – because they get to see, up close and personal, the futility of relying entirely upon
punishment as a way of getting things done. Consider, for example, the so-called “faint hope” clause in
Canada, which allows even mass murderers sentenced to life in prison a periodic opportunity to apply
for parole. This generates paroxysms of anger every few years, when convicted child-killer Clifford
Olson is granted a parole hearing. Even though he is always denied release, the mere fact that he is
being considered is enough to leave the conservative wing fuming. Yet support for the faint-hope clause
is strongest, not amongst bleeding-heart liberal sociologists who think that criminals are merely
misunderstood, but with Corrections Canada, or more specifically, among prison wardens and guards.
The problem is that without something positive to offer inmates – without a carrot to dangle in front of
them – it is simply impossible to keep some of them under control. In many cases, no amount of
coercion can replace what that one tiny, improbable ray of hope is able to achieve.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by comrade

Here's a chapter that didn't make it into Joseph Heath's book Filthy Lucre. Just something I've read that may or may not apply to this case. I don't know much about this tragedy anymore.

http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~jheath/Oldch3.pdf

I'm all for the carrot approach if a person is sufficiently sorry, shows remorse, tries to make ammends, and steps up if they did the crime.

In this case, they lied and covered up, there was a chance according to the stories that I've read that they could have prevented this tragedy and they didn't.

I believe that with the carrot there has to be a punishment aspect, you can rehabilitate all you want but at the same time there has to be a realization that your actions contain a price that has to be paid.

I'm also of the mind that there are certain people that have to be removed from society because they just aren't fixable.

I'm all for the first punishment to be all about rehabilitation and education, I would be fine with two jail systems.

I believe that repeat offenders have to be treated in a whole different light.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by comrade

Here's a chapter that didn't make it into Joseph Heath's book Filthy Lucre. Just something I've read that may or may not apply to this case. I don't know much about this tragedy anymore.

http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~jheath/Oldch3.pdf

this is such a conflicting issue for me. it's been proven that simply throwing away a criminal in jail doesn't work, and countries like Norway and Sweden who take a pure rehabilitation route for even violent offenders have drastically reduced re-offender rates. yet how can you justify giving a violent criminal a free education when many honest people can't afford that? how would it feel to be the victim's family and see a killer walk free, even if they're reformed? there just doesn't seem to be an easy answer

too bad we can't just ship them off to Australia anymore and let them fend for themselves

[Mr.Coffee]

I do understand the two points to the debate regarding imprisonment and rehabilitation. There are certainly many variables, including costs, control issues, etc.

But in my opinion, at the end of the day, a person that (purposely) takes another life outside of active combat in sovereign war, is a person that should be behind bars for the rest of their life. Give the person a thorough psychological evaluation. And if they are mentally ill, try and rehabilitate. If they aren't, well...give them food, give them a bed, let them go outside for an hour or whatever, but that's about the extent of any freedom they deserve. No chance for parole, no chance for anything. They had their chance, the person that was murdered didn't. Stick them in jail and let them sit there for the rest of their lives.

Also, the cost to the government for imprisonment, I'm sure, on a prisoner by prisoner basis, is justified by the lost life.