Stabbing in Brentwood-5 Dead, 1 Arrested

[Dan02]

I think some people are fixated on the only way justice can be dispensed is via being forced to live in a 4x8 cell on taxpayer dime.

As I see it, he's going to be on forced meds for all his life, he'll probably have to register where he is living at all times, he'll never hold down meaningful employment, he'll never be permitted to leave the country.

And all because a seemingly normal kid over the course of a month had an apparent psychotic break that caused him to commit a heinous act. The whole situation sucks for everyone involved.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by Delgar

MBates,

I agree with the above, its clear the Crown conceded even before the opening statements.

I also found it odd how the press reported on the defence counsel being "near to tears", not to say anything bad about him, but it just doesn't sit right that the lead story one day is the defence lawyer was near crying.

However, the Crown hires three experts and they all come back with consistent (though not the same) diagnoses. And we know the Crown is obligated to seek the truth, not to seek a conviction.

So what is the Crown to do here? I presume you're going to say, cross-examine the hell out of those experts, but you still need the back-up of at least one expert to provide an alternative diagnosis, don't you? Should the Crown have gone shopping for an out country expert? Doesn't that look bad by itself?

Actually, I think what I would say is the Crown perhaps ought to have informed the judge in its opening statement that it would be proving five murders that were committed by a person who was NCR.

Remove any appearance that this was a show trial and simply present up front that, while it would be ultimately up to him to decide if he accepted or rejected the defence, the Crown was essentially joining the accused in presenting the evidence.

I mean, as near as I can tell that is actually what they did anyway...so why not just say so?

And strictly speaking, every accused is presumed not to be NCR and the burden of proof is on the defence so as Crown you could technically not have any contrary expert opinion (though practically speaking you would need something to counter 3 independent experts).

[Ne7en]

Originally Posted by MattyC

The only way to guarantee public safety from anyone is to incarcerate all people. Every time you step onto the street you have a higher chance of dying from some random event than you do of Matthew De Groode coming to kill you.

Irrational. You're saying every human out there is an equal threat to the public as Degrood is? I'm pretty sure most ppl on the street have not murdered 5 people.

Originally Posted by MattyC

IMO, public safety concerns do NOT trump de Groodes freedom if he has shown to have no relapses with medication and Psychiatric experts deem him fit to at least re-enter society under supervision.

This just scares me. Public safety is #1 priority, this is why we have a justice system.

If you are confident with the rehabilitation process then I expect you to be the first to have Degrood babysit your children.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Ne7en

Irrational. You're saying every human out there is an equal threat to the public as Degrood is? I'm pretty sure most ppl on the street have not murdered 5 people.



This just scares me. Public safety is #1 priority, this is why we have a justice system.

If you are confident with the rehabilitation process then I expect you to be the first to have Degrood babysit your children.

I wouldn't let you babysit my children either so does this mean we should lock you up as well.

I would be perfectly willing for Degrood to be the Janitor where I work.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Ne7en

Irrational. You're saying every human out there is an equal threat to the public as Degrood is? I'm pretty sure most ppl on the street have not murdered 5 people.

I'm saying everyone has the capacity to kill, purposefully or not. You have an infinitely greater chance of being struck by car than you do of having deGroode come for you. He killed 5 people in a horrific way, while he had no idea what was happening. More people die every day due to a number of factors (illness, accidents).

This just scares me. Public safety is #1 priority, this is why we have a justice system.

If you are confident with the rehabilitation process then I expect you to be the first to have Degrood babysit your children.

I would rather trust that our justice system has succeeded and consulted with the proper experts, and give the proper medication, to allow de Groode to live some semblance of a life at some point than assume it fails and lock away a sick young man forever without a chance at rehabilitation.

Is "can baby-sit my kids" the bar for being allowed even a shred of freedom in our society? Because, as I said before (and this is the last time I will address this f***ing stupid strawman), there are plenty of "normal" people I wouldn't trust to take care of my dog, much less a human child.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Ne7en

Like someone said earlier.. public safety trumps degrood's freedom.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.

I would argue that nothing trumps freedom. And while I can certainly appreciate the idea that locking up De Grood for good would reduce the chances or prevent him from ever killing anyone ever again, it is a slippery slope. If the idea of public safety trumps personal freedoms, where do you want to draw the line?

Lock away all murderers for life? Certainly some might argue this. Then you get situations where you have a 12 year old girl locked away for life instead of studying at Mount Royal University a decade later with the potential to be a productive member of our society instead of a burden.

Why not simply just all violent offenders? It's hard to not recognize them as a heightened threat to public safety and the potential for them to re-offend is there.

What about medical conditions like Fetal Alcohol Syndrome? Unfortunately it's documented that people suffering from this syndrome are more prone to violence. Certainly not everybody with this condition is a risk, but it's hard to argue that they don't pose a higher risk than the average citizen - if not minute.

So why not leave it to experts? You know, trained doctors, medical experts who along with education and experience would assess the persons likelihood to re-offend and assess the risk. You know, the exact situation that De Grood will face?

[PepsiFree]

What's all this talk about babysitting? Is DeGrood a former babysitter? Has he ever stated that as part of his rehabilitation he'd like to start babysitting kids? Is this the benchmark now? Anyone who I wouldn't trust around my little nephew is going to prison where it's 'safe' for the rest of us?

Honestly, so petty. So sad. I would 100% trust DeGrood just the same (if not more so) than a few people posting in this thread right now. I think their more likely to have a negative influence on a child than DeGrood is to do any harm at all. Same goes for spending a day alone with the guy myself.

He does not scare me. His condition scares me, but this is not a condition without very significant warning signs.

We shouldn't pretend our fantasies of revenge and justice are stemmed from "empathy" for the victim's families. It isn't. It's an excuse. Selective empathy holds no merit, it's not real empathy.

[OMG!WTF!]

This is just my opinion but I think a diagnosis of being anti social or psychotic would be more worrisome in the long term than schizophrenia. de Grood wasn't burning cats in the back alley or running a major corporation or anything like that. If he responds well to treatment for what his condition is he will probably be fine. The notion of curing schizophrenia isn't reality but it can improve. It might not though too.

I just saw my schizophrenic sister today. She's ten years older and the only one left of my four siblings. I used to drive through downtown and see her wandering around completely out of it. When I could get her in my car we'd drive around for a while....until snakes started chasing us, or until the radars found us. I had to slam on the brakes in the middle of the road more than once because when she wanted out she was getting out. Left untreated she managed to get to a shelter most of the time. She ate, slept, took care of herself on good days. On bad days she sat by the river spotting toxic fish. She was never arrested for anything but one day I got arrested (not charged) for trying to catch her. She ended up freaking out at the YWCA and I'm not sure how but they got her to get treatment. She's so sick. Her body is pounded by the stress. You can tell it's killing her but she is basically normal. She goes to an office in center 70 on MacLeod trail every day for treatment. We met at a restaurant near there. Being in public is really hard for her. She's not hearing voices but she's shy, awkward, uncomfortable, quiet....all things that are amazing and wonderful for me to see. She did everything healthy people do. It just took ten times more effort.

I'm just guessing but schizophrenia seems totally random to me. De Grood may be just as likely to envision an invasion by friendly cartoon movie stars as a human conspiracy against him. One of my sister's friends was convinced JFK lived in the bathrooms at center 70. It's bloody exhausting is what it is.

[pylon]

A lot of people seemed to be citing 'trained professionals' as the ones suggesting he be released at the first possible chance. That is 100% not the case. A very close friend of mine is a licensed Psychologist, a very liberal and progressive thinking one at that. We went for a hike last weekend and had a very lengthy discussion about this case. And she does not believe he should ever have freedom. She does not believe it is worth the risk to the public either that he pulls a vanishing act, and stops his medication and therapy. And there is a large portion of her colleagues that feel the same, she admittedly clarified it as 'not all, but many.'

My Aunt is also a Psychologist and holds the same view, and is appalled Vincent Li has not only been allowed to live on his own, he has also been granted the right to change his name, and potentially hide his past from anyone he may encounter in the future.

So people need to stop with that assumption. Not every mental professional sympathizes with people with these disorders to the extent they deserve freedom. They may be willing to help them clinically, but not every single one believes they deserve the freedom some of you seem to assume they should have.

And the lack of empathy for these families on this board also sickens me as well. Regardless of if he meant to do it or not, it was a horrific act of pure evil, and no, I wouldn't want Matthew DeGrood as my neighbor, any more or less than I would want Jeffrey Dahmer.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by pylon

And the lack of empathy for these families on this board also sickens me as well.

Why do you think it's a binary decision where one can only feel empathy for de Grood or the families of those who were killed but not both? Am I somehow dishonouring the memory of the murdered students if I think that someone who the court determined was suffering from mental illness and was unable to distinguish right from wrong shouldn't be sent to rot in prison with hardened criminals but should rather be sentenced to treatment at a psychiatric facility where he'll receive the help he needs?

I feel empathy for both parties; they're all victims in this particular case.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by pylon

And the lack of empathy for these families on this board also sickens me as well. .

Must have missed a whole whack of posts because I haven't seen anyone lacking empathy for the family. If you'd link back to those so we can shame them together that would be much appreciated.

Also the whole I've got a story so I've proven a point thing doesn't mean much unfortunately.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

He never said it was all or nothing but this thread has 10x more talk about de grood than it does about any of the victims. Lately, this thread is mostly a vocal group of people trying to make other people feel bad because they don't sympathize with the murderer enough. There should be the expectation that there will be a wide variety of opinions in a case like this, I'm not sure why that is so offensive to some. Get over it, not everyone shares that opinion, and it doesn't mean they are bad people or that they need to be educated by the PC brigade.

[PepsiFree]

Anecdotal evidence is the only true evidence.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by pylon

A lot of people seemed to be citing 'trained professionals' as the ones suggesting he be released at the first possible chance. That is 100% not the case. A very close friend of mine is a licensed Psychologist, a very liberal and progressive thinking one at that. We went for a hike last weekend and had a very lengthy discussion about this case. And she does not believe he should ever have freedom. She does not believe it is worth the risk to the public either that he pulls a vanishing act, and stops his medication and therapy. And there is a large portion of her colleagues that feel the same, she admittedly clarified it as 'not all, but many.'

My Aunt is also a Psychologist and holds the same view, and is appalled Vincent Li has not only been allowed to live on his own, he has also been granted the right to change his name, and potentially hide his past from anyone he may encounter in the future.

So people need to stop with that assumption. Not every mental professional sympathizes with people with these disorders to the extent they deserve freedom. They may be willing to help them clinically, but not every single one believes they deserve the freedom some of you seem to assume they should have.

And the lack of empathy for these families on this board also sickens me as well. Regardless of if he meant to do it or not, it was a horrific act of pure evil, and no, I wouldn't want Matthew DeGrood as my neighbor, any more or less than I would want Jeffrey Dahmer.

You should find a couple psychiatrists to ask now. They are more likely to be experts in this field since any iutcome will heavily rely on medication. Two of the three experts testifying in the case were psychiatrists and the third a psychologist with expertise in the field. Do your people specialize in schizophrenia? My psychologist friend has no opinion what so ever because she's not trained especially in this area. Actually she works at the u of c and was heavily involved in counseling during the after math.

I'm not sure where you're finding this lack of empathy either.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

He never said it was all or nothing but this thread has 10x more talk about de grood than it does about any of the victims. Lately, this thread is mostly a vocal group of people trying to make other people feel bad because they don't sympathize with the murderer enough. There should be the expectation that there will be a wide variety of opinions in a case like this, I'm not sure why that is so offensive to some. Get over it, not everyone shares that opinion, and it doesn't mean they are bad people or that they need to be educated by the PC brigade.

Please don't turn this into a "we're the victims" thing. There is no brigade. It's contradictory to say that there are a wide variety of opinions that should be respected while saying "but people with _____ opinion need to quiet down!"

Pylon's post wasn't worth defending. His response to "trained professionals think he could be safe" was "WRONG, not ALL trained professionals!" which, nobody said there was some consensus.

He then mentioned some lack of empathy for the families which I don't think a SINGLE person has demonstrated.

There's no sense in falsely representing the side you disagree with. Disagree fairly, the point will be stronger.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Must have missed a whole whack of posts because I haven't seen anyone lacking empathy for the family. If you'd link back to those so we can shame them together that would be much appreciated.

Also the whole I've got a story so I've proven a point thing doesn't mean much unfortunately.

I realize it is entirely anecdotal. But the only 2 people I know on a personal level, that would even have a remotely qualified opinion on this, believe the guy should be committed for life.

Summarily, not one person on this board, myself included, has a qualified opinion either. Unless of course they are a Psychiatrist, or Psychologist. I may be wrong in thinking he is never fit for release, but those that fell he is, may be equally wrong. However those that feel he should be, seem to think they are right and everyone else who doesn't share their opinion is a misinformed, slack jawed, buffoon.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by pylon

And the lack of empathy for these families on this board also sickens me as well. Regardless of if he meant to do it or not, it was a horrific act of pure evil, and no, I wouldn't want Matthew DeGrood as my neighbor, any more or less than I would want Jeffrey Dahmer.

It sickens me that you of all people would assume there is no empathy for these families. So please do us all a favour and stop making assumptions of what we think!

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Please don't turn this into a "we're the victims" thing. There is no brigade. It's contradictory to say that there are a wide variety of opinions that should be respected while saying "but people with _____ opinion need to quiet down!"

In my view, one side is often talking down to the other like they're a bunch of out of touch, regressive old men yelling at clouds just because they don't share the same view. It gets annoying to read, and it comes off as pretentious soapbox preaching. That's all I was getting at.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

In my view, one side is often talking down to the other like they're a bunch of out of touch, regressive old men yelling at clouds just because they don't share the same view. It gets annoying to read, and it comes off as pretentious soapbox preaching. That's all I was getting at.

I would love one of them to explain it to one of the families. I can guarantee you, with 100% certainty, at least one of them, isn't sympathetic to Matthew DeGrood's plight, one iota. And that is fact.

But hey, they are just barbaric for feeling that way.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

In my view, one side is often talking down to the other like they're a bunch of out of touch, regressive old men yelling at clouds just because they don't share the same view. It gets annoying to read, and it comes off as pretentious soapbox preaching. That's all I was getting at.

That's how you feel you're being categorized and pylon feels people are lacking empathy for the five victims. Neither are reality however.