Stabbing in Brentwood-5 Dead, 1 Arrested

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

thanks. I think one of the issues I am struggling with is the use of the justice system not as one of punishment. In some cases, why isn't it? Why is vengeance, punishment not called for when a guy kills 5 people?

Because he quite literally had no idea it happened. It could happen to you, too. I think what people are struggling with, as Rube stated, is the idea that someone could be completely unaware and not at all responsible for such a tragedy.

So really, if you need somone punished I'd question your motives behind wanting it. Is it just to have a pound a flesh? If that's the case then even one of the victims brother's takes issue with your stance.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Because he quite literally had no idea it happened. It could happen to you, too. I think what people are struggling with, as Rube stated, is the idea that someone could be completely unaware and not at all responsible for such a tragedy.

So really, if you need somone punished I'd question your motives behind wanting it. Is it just to have a pound a flesh? If that's the case then even one of the victims brother's takes issue with your stance.

Honestly I'm not sure. I'll have to think about it.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Yeah... I suppose this is where it all breaks down for me. I am sure there are doctors, professionals and experts evaluating these people and I am sure Li won't re-offend. It is tragic for Li and for DeGrood. A guy like Li lost 7 years of freedom plus has this struggle for the rest of his life with his illness.

Unfortunately, the guy who was beheaded lost what, 60, 70 years of life too. On this basis, I don't think I agree with a guy like Li being ever allowed to live on his own or have unsupervised access to society.

You illustrated perfectly the divide in this thread about how the courts should treat De Groot. Maybe in time both sides will come to an agreement on the right thing to do

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Honestly I'm not sure. I'll have to think about it.

For sure, that's all anyone can ask in these threads. Consider this post by the brother of one of the victims.

To be clear, there is no outcome of Matthew Degrood's trial that would be better or less painful for me.
Please do NOT tell me he "got off easy" or "won the trial"- it's really not comforting. There are no winners here; five people are still gone, one man still killed them and he's still sick. The families and friends of these six people will deal with the repercussions the rest of our lives.
Please do NOT malign mental illness or disparage the mentally ill. I do not have the energy to respond when people say something along those lines, other than I believe he is truly sick and hope he gets the treatment he needs.
Please do become more informed about our justice system. NCR is still imprisonment, offenders are held and treated at the psychiatric unit of the correctional centres in Spy Hill with annual reviews. I would hope it is recognized how dangerous he became so quickly and High Risk NCR is a consideration. For my own peace of mind I have to trust the Crown and health professionals in adhering to their mandate of keeping everyone safe including him.
In the end the most important part for me is that the lives of my brother, Lawrence and Kaiti, Jordan, Josh and Zack be valued and remembered.

[Canehdianman]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

To be honest, I don't even know what "Justice for the family" means. Can you quantify that?

Before you guys all jump on me for participating in this circle jerk, I also don't think that he should ever be released, but that's because there is no way to ensure he doesn't do this again.

There is no way to ensure you don't do it either.

Where should we lock you up?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

There is no way to ensure you don't do it either.

Where should we lock you up?

Better safe than sorry.

[DionTheDman]

I don't know why I'm reopening this can of worms that the Vince Li discharge caused, but here we go...

http://globalnews.ca/news/3343780/mo...pite-concerns/

Ten months after he was declared not criminally responsible (NCR) for the worst mass killing in Calgary’s history, Matthew de Grood will start seeking freedoms.

...

The board has three options: they can order de Grood to continue treatment in a secure facility, grant him a conditional discharge or give him an absolute discharge.

In Canada, the system deals with NCR cases as medical issues, not criminal ones.

[Language]

“He killed five people in under two minutes,” Rathwell said. “I don’t know how any doctor can play God like that and say we know for a fact that he will never do this again.”

This pretty much sums up my feelings on the issue, as per one of the victim's parents.

Sucks for his mental illness, but sometimes life just isn't fair, and even if there's a 95% chance he'll be a model citizen the rest of his life, I still don't believe society should take that risk. Sometimes the crime is just so horrific that the perpetrator (even if they were in a "mental" state) have to pay serious consequences.

Life certainly wasn't fair to those 5 that were brutally murdered.

[Fuzz]

Too soon. Waaaay to soon.

[polak]

Ridiculous.

Way too soon and frankly disrespectful towards the victims.

[MBates]

This story strikes me as deliberately misleading seeking internet traffic.

All of the interviews seem clear that the people have been asked to respond to the prospect of Degrood receiving an absolute discharge into the community when there is no indication that is even remotely close to what is currently happening.

These issues are difficult enough to genuinely grapple with. We certainly do not need garbage masquerading as journalism to create false debates and controversies.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by MBates

This story strikes me as deliberately misleading seeking internet traffic.

All of the interviews seem clear that the people have been asked to respond to the prospect of Degrood receiving an absolute discharge into the community when there is no indication that is even remotely close to what is currently happening.

These issues are difficult enough to genuinely grapple with. We certainly do not need garbage masquerading as journalism to create false debates and controversies.

Works like a charm, no wonder media is heading this way. No one reads anything anymore, they just get what they believe to be the gist of it and react.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Works like a charm, no wonder media is heading this way. No one reads anything anymore, they just get what they believe to be the gist of it and react.

Are you suggesting there is more to the story than what I picked up from hovering my mouse over the URL? Who has time for that?

[Huntingwhale]

Here we go again. We can simply swap Li's name with DeGrood, have the same posters say the exact same arguments as Li's thread, and save ourselves the anguish of arguing!

[GGG]

“It’s not up to the patient to prove he isn’t a risk, rather, it’s up to the board to find evidence that he is a risk,” forensic psychologist Dr. Patrick Baillie explained. “And if they don’t find any risk, then they’re compelled to provide an absolute discharge.”

From the article. I think I disagree with who has the burden here. I think it should be up to the patient to prove that they are not a greater risk than the general public rather than the onus be on the crown to prove there is a risk.

The quote taken from the article terribly misleading as all the defense is asking for is the slow addition of more freedoms in the process to getting an absolute discharge. They are not asking for an absolute discharge at this time.

[polak]

Originally Posted by GGG

From the article. I think I disagree with who has the burden here. I think it should be up to the patient to prove that they are not a greater risk than the general public rather than the onus be on the crown to prove there is a risk.

The quote taken from the article terribly misleading as all the defense is asking for is the slow addition of more freedoms in the process to getting an absolute discharge. They are not asking for an absolute discharge at this time.

That works for this situation where they guy lost it and killed 5 people but I think it's designed to protect people that are more in the grey area of mental illness. Like innocent until proven guilty.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by polak

That works for this situation where they guy lost it and killed 5 people but I think it's designed to protect people that are more in the grey area of mental illness. Like innocent until proven guilty.

I guess my standard would be if you are found not criminally responsible by reason of mental defect the onus would be on you to prove you are no longer a greater risk than the average person to get an absolute discharge.

Basically the act that led to the NCR finding proves that you are a risk therefore you are a risk until proven safe.

[Jason14h]

How can you prove either?

[Drummer]

Matthew de Grood should write a book and it should be titled "How to get away with (serial) murder"

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by GGG

From the article. I think I disagree with who has the burden here. I think it should be up to the patient to prove that they are not a greater risk than the general public rather than the onus be on the crown to prove there is a risk.

The quote taken from the article terribly misleading as all the defense is asking for is the slow addition of more freedoms in the process to getting an absolute discharge. They are not asking for an absolute discharge at this time.

agree with your first part.

after only 10 months, I don't think he should at this time be getting any freedoms. maybe after a few years of proper patient care in a secure facility, they can slowly ease his restrictions.
sick or not, he killed 5 people. no way he should get freedoms so soon.