Man stabbed, then decapitated on grey hound bus

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

How do you know their mindset aligns with yours? Pretty arrogant statement. Who are you to say they don't feel compassion for him, despite what happened to their son. You have no idea, you're assuming they think exactly like you. Are they for the death penalty? How would that ease their minds if they're against it?

The mother of Tim McLean has been heavily critical of the decisions made and has petitioned to change the law to keep Li locked up for life. It's not unreasonable considering what she has gone through. But allowing victims to decide the fates of individuals, especially those suffering mental disorders and deemed not criminally responsible, is not a society I would want to live in.

We can feel sorry for the victims, we can put weight on their judgment and recommendation, but at the end of the day if we were to allow victims decide the punishment, society would crumble.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

McLean............if you are going to to hide behind the well being of the family at least get their name correct.

lol get off your high horse, he just missed some punctuation.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

lol get off your high horse, he just missed some punctuation.

All his initial posts are about shooting Li, killing him off, retribution.

His concerns for the family appear a little to "Johnny come lately"


But I don't give a rat's about you or your opinions.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Here's an article from a year ago expressing her views:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...-law-1.2502104

De Delley said she will still fight to have the law changed.

"A killer is a killer, if you take a life, you forfeit your freedom for the rest of your life," she said. "The only thing that should change with a mentally ill killer is that they should serve their sentence in a place where they can also receive treatment."

[Nyah]

Her statement makes no sense to me. What's the point of a mentally ill person receiving treatment if she thinks they should still just be institutionalized for the rest of their lives anyway?

[polak]

Parole.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Nyah

Her statement makes no sense to me. What's the point of a mentally ill person receiving treatment if she thinks they should still just be institutionalized for the rest of their lives anyway?

Just wondering. what do you think would be a fair sentence for a violent murderer who chopped off one of your family members head?

Answer #1, If he's just plain violent would the answer be - life in jail?

Answer #2, If he's "nuts" and hears voices in his head would the answer be - when he stops hearing voices?

Sorry man, her son was killed and his head paraded and chewed on like a leg of lamb in front of 40 people, this freak should never be a free man..ever. let alone 7 years later..

This guy is so lucky he did this in Canada and not in his native China

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by T@T

This guy is so lucky he did this in Canada and not in his native China

That's not saying much. I'm not a bad dude but trust me I've done things I'm glad I didn't do in China as well!!

[polak]

My stance the whole time has been he should serve out his sentence in under supervision at a institution and then if has been a model "prisoner" and is showing improvement, qualify him for early parole.

I just never understood the rush to get him out so quick and apparently that makes me a bad guy.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by polak

My stance the whole time has been he should serve out his sentence in under supervision at a institution and then if has been a model "prisoner" and is showing improvement, qualify him for early parole.

I just never understood the rush to get him out so quick and apparently that makes me a bad guy.

That's not anywhere close to what your stance was earlier...

Originally Posted by polak

I don't know. To me, when it comes to MURDER, "justice" is quite a valid reason to keep someone locked up for the rest of their lives. He 100%, without doubt killed somebody on purpose and quite brutally and now there is a chance he will be free. That is not okay in my books regardless of sanity.

Plus, he's living in a group home and has to be heavily medicated for the rest of his life. It's not like society is missing out on much.

But then again, in situations like this, where there is zero doubt of who comitted the murder and why, I'm A-OK with the death penalty, so I'm biased. I just don't see how he deserves to be free in any way.

If I was the family of his victim I'd be devastated. How has justice been served? Their son/sibling/boyfriend/husband is gone, by virtue of public decapitation, and this guy gets to have any semblence of freedom? The system failed.

I don't believe there's been anyone at all who has advocated his release unconditionally. The recommendation was to move him from his current location to a psychiatric unit in Winnipeg, supervise his condition there, give him unsupervised day releases more frequently and then, if everything goes well, look at the possibility of sending him to a group home where he would still be supervised and gradually reintroduce him to society.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

My stance the whole time has been he should serve out his sentence in under supervision at a institution and then if has been a model "prisoner" and is showing improvement, qualify him for early parole.

I just never understood the rush to get him out so quick and apparently that makes me a bad guy.

He doesn't have a "senctence" or a criminal record.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bre...wAllComments=y

Vincent Li is headed to a hospital – not a prison cell – after being found not criminally responsible today for the murder of Tim McLean on board a Greyhound bus last summer.
Li admitted killing, beheading and cannibalizing McLean but believed he was acting under commands from God to attack a "demon" or else he would be executed, court heard during the two-day trial.

He will be institutionalized without a criminal record and will be reassessed every year by a mental health review board to determine if he is fit for release into the community.

It would seem to me that he did meet your criteria:

Originally Posted by polak

is showing improvement, qualify him for early parole.

The experts have said he has improved.


You know I wonder if we as a society truely believe that mental illness is the same as physical illness.

I wonder how people feel about an individual that has a physical health episode that resulted in the death of an other person.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by polak

My stance the whole time has been he should serve out his sentence in under supervision at a institution and then if has been a model "prisoner" and is showing improvement, qualify him for early parole.

I just never understood the rush to get him out so quick and apparently that makes me a bad guy.

Also what do you mean by serving out his sentence and early parole?

He wasn't sentenced to any time because he was found not criminally responsible...

He was placed in a hospital where he would be reevaluated each year until he is found not to be a public safety risk. There was no timeline, there is no sentence he is serving.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Also what do you mean by serving out his sentence and early parole?

He wasn't sentenced to any time because he was found not criminally responsible...

He was placed in a hospital where he would be reevaluated each year until he is found not to be a public safety risk. There was no timeline, there is no sentence he is serving.

I know but I mean the equivalent sentece. Lets not get caught up in this again.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by polak

I know but I mean the equivalent sentece. Lets not get caught up in this again.

Caught up in what again?

You want him to serve his sentence (which is different from your stance a couple days ago that he should never be allowed out) but also ignore the fact he wasn't sentenced? This isn't a little detail, you can't say he should serve his sentence if he doesn't have one. If you want an "equivalent sentence", how do you come to a date for his release?

If it's based on rehabilitation/mental health, well it's arguably he served that stage of the sentence as his psychiatrists are recommending to the board to move him to Winnipeg's hospital.

If it's based on punishment, you're advocating punishing a man who had no control over his actions? For what purpose? What good does that do? How many years do you want?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Caught up in what again?

You want him to serve his sentence (which is different from your stance a couple days ago that he should never be allowed out) but also ignore the fact he wasn't sentenced? This isn't a little detail, you can't say he should serve his sentence if he doesn't have one. If you want an "equivalent sentence", how do you come to a date for his release?

If it's based on rehabilitation/mental health, well it's arguably he served that stage of the sentence as his psychiatrists are recommending to the board to move him to Winnipeg's hospital.

If it's based on punishment, you're advocating punishing a man who had no control over his actions? For what purpose? What good does that do? How many years do you want?

Excellent post.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Caught up in what again?

You want him to serve his sentence (which is different from your stance a couple days ago that he should never be allowed out) but also ignore the fact he wasn't sentenced? This isn't a little detail, you can't say he should serve his sentence if he doesn't have one. If you want an "equivalent sentence", how do you come to a date for his release?

If it's based on rehabilitation/mental health, well it's arguably he served that stage of the sentence as his psychiatrists are recommending to the board to move him to Winnipeg's hospital.

If it's based on punishment, you're advocating punishing a man who had no control over his actions? For what purpose? What good does that do? How many years do you want?

Umm the entire time I was arguing that he should be kept under supervision for longer. Not that he should be held locked up forever. Never once did I say that.

I think he should be supervised for longer. That's all. It's only been 7 years.

It's not based on punishment, it's based on risk and apperance. Apperance to appease the public and the victims.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by polak

I know but I mean the equivalent sentece. Lets not get caught up in this again.

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Caught up in what again?

You want him to serve his sentence (which is different from your stance a couple days ago that he should never be allowed out) but also ignore the fact he wasn't sentenced? This isn't a little detail, you can't say he should serve his sentence if he doesn't have one. If you want an "equivalent sentence", how do you come to a date for his release?

If it's based on rehabilitation/mental health, well it's arguably he served that stage of the sentence as his psychiatrists are recommending to the board to move him to Winnipeg's hospital.

If it's based on punishment, you're advocating punishing a man who had no control over his actions? For what purpose? What good does that do? How many years do you want?

You two both realize, that there are circumstances where, if he WAS in full control of his faculties, he would be out on parole by now anyways? It's been 7 years since he was taken into custody. With some of that being prior time served being counted at time and a half, if he was convicted of second degree murder with a minimum sentence of 10 years, he could be eligible for parole right now. If we take his psychiatric evaluation as equivalent to a parole hearing, then he could be free on parole, which is pretty close to what he has now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimina...cing_in_Canada

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

McLean............if you are going to to hide behind the well being of the family at least get their name correct.

lol

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

I don't know. To me, when it comes to MURDER, "justice" is quite a valid reason to keep someone locked up for the rest of their lives. He 100%, without doubt killed somebody on purpose and quite brutally and now there is a chance he will be free. That is not okay in my books regardless of sanity.

Plus, he's living in a group home and has to be heavily medicated for the rest of his life. It's not like society is missing out on much.

But then again, in situations like this, where there is zero doubt of who comitted the murder and why, I'm A-OK with the death penalty, so I'm biased. I just don't see how he deserves to be free in any way.

If I was the family of his victim I'd be devastated. How has justice been served? Their son/sibling/boyfriend/husband is gone, by virtue of public decapitation, and this guy gets to have any semblence of freedom? The system failed.

Actually your first post about seems to point to you thinking he should be killed or at the very least locked up forever.

Originally Posted by polak

Umm the entire time I was arguing that he should be kept under supervision for longer. Not that he should be held locked up forever. Never once did I say that.

I think he should be supervised for longer. That's all. It's only been 7 years.

It's not based on punishment, it's based on risk and apperance. Apperance to appease the public and the victims.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

lol

indeed