Douglas Garland Trial - Guilty- 1st degree- 3 counts / 75 years no parole.

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I mostly agree with you, except that I think that it's all about the boy. Murdering an innocent little boy because you're mad at his grandfather is horrible. Even hardened criminals still remember the faces of their own children, nephews and nieces. And with not much else to do, beating a guy that did something as bad as this is probably a nice way to spend sunday afternoon. Bonus is that the free public aint even mad.

I totally agree. The beatings are retribution for what the piece of trash did to Nathan.

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by MBates

It is really odd how everyone appears willing to speculate a chivilrous maximum security inmate as a do-gooder with a moral compass being the attacker since that makes it apparently easier to feel good about the jailhouse Justice.

If another kid murderer did it then what? Do we no longer like the guy or does his 'morality' carry the day?

I don't find the beating chivalrous; an ####### got beat up because he did something horrific. Good for him. I'm glad he got beat up but that doesn't make me like the criminals who did it. I'm not speculating that any of these guys are do-gooders; if they were, they wouldn't be in prison

I'm not a bleeding heart. Are you? If you are not a guard already but you are worried about the inmates safety, go become a prison guard and protect the guy.

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I respect your professionalism, but he no longer deserves to be addressed so politely. He's not "Mr. Garland" and he's sure as FK not "Doug". He's Douglas Garland, or Garland.

He doesn't even deserve a name, should be a file number.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I respect your professionalism, but he no longer deserves to be addressed so politely. He's not "Mr. Garland" and he's sure as FK not "Doug". He's Douglas Garland, or Garland.

?

The police, Crown, courts and even some corrections officers will call him Mr Garland still. The 'Doug' reference and 'next door neighbours' was deliberate attempt to show Delgar his idea of guys he would like to buy drinks for are not who he was imagining they were.

Anyway, call him whatever you want. I doesn't bother me. I don't see how his crimes or guilt are diminished if I don't follow your declaration of his appropriate manner of being spoken about.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by MBates

You may not have followed this one through. Mr. Garland is serving in a maximum security unit with similar offenders. So I bet you wouldn't cover their drinks once you found out why they were Doug's next door neighbours.

We don't know this. He could be in jail with a guy who killed a guy because he killed his brother.

That's the way I like to look at it. Not all people in jail are bad people, we know Garland is a POS scumbag human being. I'd also buy his attackers a round of beers. And maybe some wings.

[CaptainCrunch]

I think if you're convicted and thrown in prison, you should be addressed by a number and not your name. You have to earn your humanity back. You're not Joe Smith. Your convict number 1351B. Here's your bowl of flavorless gruel and your glass of flavorless vitamin C infused water.

[8 Ball]

Originally Posted by MBates

?

The police, Crown, courts and even some corrections officers will call him Mr Garland still. The 'Doug' reference and 'next door neighbours' was deliberate attempt to show Delgar his idea of guys he would like to buy drinks for are not who he was imagining they were.

Anyway, call him whatever you want. I doesn't bother me. I don't see how his crimes or guilt are diminished if I don't follow your declaration of his appropriate manner of being spoken about.

Stupid question, but are his lawyers still representing him through to a possible appeal? And if so, do they have any power to recommend special handling for him inside the institution? Or is that up to the government now.

[Pizza]

I too would buy these men a drink.

If a majority of people find these vigilante beatings are justified, who are the lawyers to tell them that they're wrong?

Looking forward to hearing about a third round of assault on that POS

[MBates]

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

I don't find the beating chivalrous; an ####### got beat up because he did something horrific. Good for him. I'm glad he got beat up but that doesn't make me like the criminals who did it. I'm not speculating that any of these guys are do-gooders; if they were, they wouldn't be in prison

I'm not a bleeding heart. Are you? If you are not a guard already but you are worried about the inmates safety, go become a prison guard and protect the guy.

Whoa...wow...I never said you were like the people who did it. Seriously.

I spoke to someone today who spoke to the person in charge of the prison. They don't know yet who did it or why and while they certainly have not ruled out it was because his crimes were so horrible, they also know that doesn't immediately make sense given who he is living with. You do the reading between the lines on that one.

All I have said is the suggestion it is inmates who still have morality (which itself implies a certain level of justness in the beating of the bigger monster) is speculative and from what I am hearing may be entirely wrong.

[calgaryblood]

It's also way too early to knew if he got beat up because of the murders. It could have also been because of something that happened in prison.

Either way, glad he got beat up.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by MBates

?

The police, Crown, courts and even some corrections officers will call him Mr Garland still. The 'Doug' reference and 'next door neighbours' was deliberate attempt to show Delgar his idea of guys he would like to buy drinks for are not who he was imagining they were.

Anyway, call him whatever you want. I doesn't bother me. I don't see how his crimes or guilt are diminished if I don't follow your declaration of his appropriate manner of being spoken about.

You are one cold dude. I admit that I speak with emotion, as the father of a five year old, and the son of parents, and you speak as a defense lawyer. I don't want to suggest that professional opinions aren't appreciated here, because they are, but it's kind of surprising how you keep jumping to Garland's defense, even after it's all said and done.

I have to quit this thread, because it kind of bothers me how little this case bothers some other people.

[OMG!WTF!]

I really don't like that he got beat up again. It's just another ugly thing piled on a horrible pile of ugly crap. The way I see it is four guys in Calgary now have assault charges to deal with and a few more years to serve and another strike against them for life. One of them is 20 years old and no doubt has a bunch of 20 year old buddies who think he's the man and can't wait to get their chance as street judicial official.

Now there will likely be a few guys in Edmonton who will get charged maybe even with attempted murder and lose another decade of their lives. Then there are the people who have to clean up the mess. This might be the one time, the one incident that causes nightmares for the rest of some poor sot's life. Garland's eyeball hanging out in a pool of blood on the prison floor is not something I'd want too deal with every time I get a decent rem sleep going.

And now we're out another 10-50k in medical bills for the guy, a few extra million to keep the guy safe for the next twenty years, And for what? I know exactly what it's for. I had the chance to confront a guy who assaulted me and changed the course of every last second of my life until the day I die. And it's not fun. I had lawyers promise me he would get what's coming to him in jail. And it made me sick. I hated hearing that. I don't want any of that because it just makes life ugly. I'm better off never thinking about these people. I hope he lives peacefully somewhere no one ever has to see him again. That's the best case scenario here.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by 4X4

You are one cold dude. I admit that I speak with emotion, as the father of a five year old, and the son of parents, and you speak as a defense lawyer. I don't want to suggest that professional opinions aren't appreciated here, because they are, but it's kind of surprising how you keep jumping to Garland's defense, even after it's all said and done.

I have to quit this thread, because it kind of bothers me how little this case bothers some other people.

To be fair to me, since I post as me, MBates the lawyer, I am somewhat constrained in how I post. That aside, I choose to post in these threads with my defence lawyer hat firmly on.

If I am overdoing that, I can stop. I literally had to be told by a judge today to stop talking. It happens to me on occasion.

I would be naive to think nearly 15 years of this job has not changed me. It has to have. But I'm not the cold dude you imagine from my posts. For reasons that may be obvious I don't post about my kids. But they exist. And I love them.

And for reasons that should now be obvious, I don't allow myself to really mix my family and work lives. Which likely explains how I come across as a poster that is not bothered by this or other such cases.

If you want to know the truth...the gore and the obvious disturbing stuff isn't what gets to me. It's strange little things that seem benign but for some reason just get to you. I can't explain why that happens but it does.

But I will also say that your perspective is forced to be different when you speak with a person who has done horrible things and you are confronted with the reality of them being a person who at one time may have been just the same as you or me. I'm not speaking of any person here just the generalized statement.

So don't leave the thread on my account. Leave if you want, but if giving the defence lawyer contrarian position a rest is needed then I can make that happen pretty easily.

[4X4]

Goddammit, Bates. Stop being so reasonable. All I want to do is hate that guy with every molecule in my body, and you keep being reasonable. At least I know who to call if I ever commit a heinous crime. You will not judge me based on my CP posts. I almost hate the fact that I respect you.

[MBates]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

We don't know this. He could be in jail with a guy who killed a guy because he killed his brother.

That's the way I like to look at it. Not all people in jail are bad people, we know Garland is a POS scumbag human being. I'd also buy his attackers a round of beers. And maybe some wings.

I don't personally know this I admit. But I can tell you that ordinarily prisons do not put child killers with people who are most likely to attack child killers.

And so my point really remains the same and I ask you, if the attackers are themselves heinous child murderers will you still buy them beer and wings?

And if you continue to say yes, then obviously if Mr Garland beats another child murderer next week you will also be buying him a round as well?

Sorry, I can understand people saying they are happy he got beat up but I just can't grasp this desperate need to step up and buy beers for guys you have no idea what they did to who in order to be beside Garland in Edmonton Max.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by MBates

To be fair to me, since I post as me, MBates the lawyer, I am somewhat constrained in how I post. That aside, I choose to post in these threads with my defence lawyer hat firmly on.

If I am overdoing that, I can stop. I literally had to be told by a judge today to stop talking. It happens to me on occasion.

I would be naive to think nearly 15 years of this job has not changed me. It has to have. But I'm not the cold dude you imagine from my posts. For reasons that may be obvious I don't post about my kids. But they exist. And I love them.

And for reasons that should now be obvious, I don't allow myself to really mix my family and work lives. Which likely explains how I come across as a poster that is not bothered by this or other such cases.

If you want to know the truth...the gore and the obvious disturbing stuff isn't what gets to me. It's strange little things that seem benign but for some reason just get to you. I can't explain why that happens but it does.

But I will also say that your perspective is forced to be different when you speak with a person who has done horrible things and you are confronted with the reality of them being a person who at one time may have been just the same as you or me. I'm not speaking of any person here just the generalized statement.

So don't leave the thread on my account. Leave if you want, but if giving the defence lawyer contrarian position a rest is needed then I can make that happen pretty easily.

I think you should keep doing exactly what you're doing, both on the board and off it.

Defence lawyers are critical to our polity; it is too easy to allow the rights of individuals as against the state to be eroded under cover of the fact that the state generally exercises its power against people who are morally hard to sympathize with.

And I can only imagine that it is a hard path to walk sometimes. My own path is easier, as the only thing my clients stand to lose (most of the time) is money, and the disputes I'm involved with take place in a very "lawful-neutral" moral universe. I couldn't do what you do, and I really respect the people who can.

[Flames_Gimp]

really the death penalty would have been more humane (and cheaper) in this case, wish it was an option!

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

really the death penalty would have been more humane (and cheaper) in this case, wish it was an option!

Disagree. I want him to think about this in his cold jail cell for about 74 years. Then he can die from one of these beatings that I shouldn't be happy about.

I don't think the government should have the power to kill citizens.

[Northendzone]

As much as I think garland deserves a regular beatdown, I also find it interesting that even amongst the dregs of society there is a pecking order or a code.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

really the death penalty would have been more humane (and cheaper) in this case, wish it was an option!

The death penalty costs tax payers way more money than a prison sentence.