Homolka stuff

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Manics

Banned
So this biotch is getting out of prison after 12 years for the murders of 3 girls, and now her new boyfriend is a convicted murderer serving a life sentence in jail. Fuck, if this was a hollywood script I wouldn't believe it. Does it get any more stupid?

Homolka to be released
 
I don't see if they can release people that were wrongly convicted due to facts coming after the trial, and people can't be let in prison longer due to facts coming after the trial. My 3 cents.
 
They had to make a deal with her to get her to testify against her husband. It was a shitty deal but they went with the lesser of two evils. I suspect she may very well dissapear shorty after being released and I'm nto talking about any witness protection program.
 
Yes, but she was playing the "I'm a victim too" card, which was proven false after the trial. I'd reneg the deal.

(sweet I used reneg)
 
Unfortunatly the law just can't reneg a deal. It's not like they can just change their minds and do whatever they want. They made the deal and have to live with it.
 
There's still that 'Jane Doe' murder that they haven't tried her on, and now the Ontario attorney general or whatever his title is, is saying that they're not going to dig up the old case. Fucking braindead idiots, if there's another chance out there to put this woman back in jail, use it!

She wants to move to N.D.G here in Montreal. FUCK THAT NOISE! Nobody wants her here, and I've got a feeling that she won't last a week, the death threats and destruction that will be sent her way will drive her nuts.
 
darscot said:
Unfortunatly the law just can't reneg a deal. It's not like they can just change their minds and do whatever they want. They made the deal and have to live with it.
Click to expand...

The hell they can't... robbery murders happen all the time. ;)
 
You know, let her be released, but let the country vote on where to put her ass. I'd vote as far North as possible. With an ankle bracelet.
 
The country can't just decide where to send her. She served her time and now she is free. She is an evil bitch and deserves the fires of hell but I would defend her right to freedom. That's what it means to live in a free society. There is only one rule of law and everyone has to live with it. Clealry its flawed but you can't just make it up as you go.

This bitch will get hers sometimes you just have to let the unwritten law deal with things.
 
darscot said:
They had to make a deal with her to get her to testify against her husband. It was a shitty deal but they went with the lesser of two evils. I suspect she may very well dissapear shorty after being released and I'm nto talking about any witness protection program.
Click to expand...



There's speculation as to whether she was the "lesser of two evils". There is a case to be made that it was SHE who actually killed the two schoolgirls while Bernardo was out getting stuff. She's really fucked up.
 
6.8 said:
I don't see if they can release people that were wrongly convicted due to facts coming after the trial, and people can't be let in prison longer due to facts coming after the trial. My 3 cents.
Click to expand...

If the government were able to do this, it would essentially give them all the time in the world to come up with new ways to keep people they don't like in prison after the fact. The government gets one shot at convicting people (aside from failures in process), and it really is, in the long run, far better that way.

See: double jeopardy (the legal term, not the gameshow term).
 
From my point of view even if she did the killing she is the lesser of two evils simple for the fact that she is a women. Female serial killers and sexual assault is far more rare in women. So by the law of averages society would be safer with her in it over him. Also it may be very chauvinistic but I have no fear of a women, a man however is whole other ball game.
 
6.8 said:
Yes, but she was playing the "I'm a victim too" card, which was proven false after the trial. I'd reneg the deal.

(sweet I used reneg)
Click to expand...

Not being a jerk here or anything - just trying to be helpful...For future reference, it's renege.

Now, normally I'd say this lady served her time, paid her debt, yadayadayada, but I heard on the radio this morning that her cellmate said Homolka hasn't learned a thing, and is not planning on changing her ways. That's disturbing if true :/.

They should have said she could get out in 12 years *provided* she was rehabilitated (and yes some people just can't be). They're also saying she is a prime candidate to re-offend. How do people get this way?

I really hope she doesn't profit off of her crimes as well. That would just be putting salt in the wound.
 
darscot said:
From my point of view even if she did the killing she is the lesser of two evils simple for the fact that she is a women. Female serial killers and sexual assault is far more rare in women. So by the law of averages society would be safer with her in it over him. Also it may be very chauvinistic but I have no fear of a women, a man however is whole other ball game.
Click to expand...

Whether or not serial killers are statistically less likely to be female, an individual is not a statistic. 1% of all serial killers being female does not equate to all individual females being 1% likely to be serial killers.

This is a classic abuse of statistics.
 
I don't think 12 years for three people (one of them was her sister ) is anywhere close enough to serving her time regardless of whether or not she was rehabilitated or whatever. (And how do serial killers get rehabilitated? I seriously doubt jail time changes their way of thinking, except to the extent of thinking "Okay next time, I won't get caught." The woman is a total psychopath--she should never be released. Canada is way too easy on killers and abusers--they protect them more than the victims. Homolka is at high risk to re-offend--why should someone else have to die for her to be locked up where she belongs?
 
maharg said:
Whether or not serial killers are statistically less likely to be female, an individual is not a statistic. 1% of all serial killers being female does not equate to all individual females being 1% likely to be serial killers.

This is a classic abuse of statistics.
Click to expand...

My point was I would rather have her out over him. Not the validity of statistics.
 
Um. You used statistics to back your rather absurd point. It's not you that's at risk from either of them but young girls, anyways, so I'm not sure what your personal feelings of threat from a woman or a man have to do with it to begin with.
 
Manics said:
So this biotch is getting out of prison after 12 years for the murders of 3 girls, and now her new boyfriend is a convicted murderer serving a life sentence in jail. Fuck, if this was a hollywood script I wouldn't believe it. Does it get any more stupid?

Homolka to be released
Click to expand...

Actually, it is a Hollywood script now...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0424938/

Jane Doe rape, not murder, is the charge she hasn't been tried on. I think there is room for that trial to happen (from what I've read, it may be beyond the scope of the plea deal), but I think she might just be released and that'll be the end of it.

In the end, it's a shame she's getting out due to a botched investigation. Because let's face it, those tapes would have destroyed any shot at a deal she ever had.
 
God that woman gives me the creeps.

I used to live a couple houses away from them when I was a kid, one day I remember stopping at a crosswalk with a couple of friends as she drove by and she gave us this ugly stare, like one of those stares that send shivers down your spine, turns out my friend was making a stupid face to her as she drove by but I’ll be dammed if it didn't completely creep me out. To this day, every time I see her, I remember that damned stare, it'll haunt me for the rest of my days.....
 
She actually dressed up in her sister's clothes a couple of days after the burial and danced around for her husband and taped it.



Twisted Mother f'er.
 
Your friend better hide his ass.


This is so crazy though, the prosecution and police royally screwed up in making a deal with Homolka to get to Bernardo. Homolka used a bullshit coercion defense after signing the deal and Bernardo told his lawyer about hidden tapes that showed Homolka taking an equal part. The police should have found the damn tapes they were just hidden in a pot light.

Evil Bitch.
 
maharg said:
Um. You used statistics to back your rather absurd point. It's not you that's at risk from either of them but young girls, anyways, so I'm not sure what your personal feelings of threat from a woman or a man have to do with it to begin with.
Click to expand...

The fact that I have a young daughter, I think qualifies me. I'm not sure what your point is? I tried to clarify mine. I'll try once more. The circumstances of the case dictated that in order to insure they both went behind bars they had to give one of them a deal. My opinion is that I'm glad they made the deal with her over him. It's just my opinion it may not be the same as yours. I tried to state why its my opinion. You have pointed out that I'm not a statistics major. Was there something else you were trying to say?
 
darscot said:
The fact that I have a young daughter, I think qualifies me. I'm not sure what your point is? I tried to clarify mine. I'll try once more. The circumstances of the case dictated that in order to insure they both went behind bars they had to give one of them a deal. My opinion is that I'm glad they made the deal with her over him. It's just my opinion it may not be the same as yours. I tried to state why its my opinion. You have pointed out that I'm not a statistics major. Was there something else you were trying to say?
Click to expand...



Sorry to jump into the heated debate, but your original line of "From my point of view even if she did the killing she is the lesser of two evils simple for the fact that she is a women" was pretty out there. I mean there's no way to qualify "evil" as being the lesser of. Evil is evil and she's evil and shoudln't be getting out. The fact that her personality is the type that seems to latch onto crazy killer-type men that seem to satisfy her morbid fascinations is even more disturbing. She already has a crazy new boyfriend in prison, who knows who she'll hook up with once she's out. That's the problem.
 
Ah, thank you now I see where the confusion is coming from. That sentence was rather poor. I was making the assumption that they were both evil. Who actually dealt the fatal blow was trivial. If you have to release a cold blooded killer one being male and one female. I'll take the female. Like I said probable chauvinistic and clearly not well founded in statistics but still remains my opinion. Another point that I did not state clearly was I think she will latch onto another nutbar and God willing get herself killed. Her husband on the other hand would probable rope in another girl or many and keep on killing.

One last thing I did not mean it was chavinistic because I thought women were more evil then men. I was trying to say it was chavinistic to believe that men were stronger and more powerful and probable better killers then women.
 
"Another point that I did not state clearly was I think she will latch onto another nutbar and God willing get herself killed. Her husband on the other hand would probable rope in another girl or many and keep on killing."

In so far as both of these situations lead to more victims, I fail to see the moral distinction you're trying to draw.
 
Morality has nothing to do with it. Like I said with a little luck upon her release she will get bounced from abusive relationship to abusive relationship. Were she will be the person getting abused. I can't really think of a better thing to happen to her. One day we may even get lucky and some one will kill her. If her husband was the one let out odds are he will bounce from abusive relationship to abusive relationship but he will be the one doing the abusing. It's not an opinion based on statistics, hard facts or logic. Just a bit of a twisted game of "Would you rather?"

I'm not 100% but I'm fairly sure her testimony against her husband did allow him to be convicted and labeled a dangerous offened which means he will never get out.
 
darscot said:
The country can't just decide where to send her. She served her time and now she is free. She is an evil bitch and deserves the fires of hell but I would defend her right to freedom. That's what it means to live in a free society. There is only one rule of law and everyone has to live with it. Clealry its flawed but you can't just make it up as you go.

This bitch will get hers sometimes you just have to let the unwritten law deal with things.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. We've had 12 years to cry about this...going on and on about this now seems like closing the barn door after the horse as bolted. Particularly when there are hundreds of examples of people commiting the same sort of shit (or worse) getting the same amount of time (or less). And most of those people didn't even cut any deals.

Of course if I ever walked past her and she even glanced at me with a raised eyebrow, she'd be going through a window. I would hope I'd take my punishment like a man.

I have found it amusing how some politicians and other people don't want the movie based on these events to be released in Ontario. It's okay to show people drowning on a boat after it's hit an iceberg, or getting burned and butchered to death on a French coast line, or showing numerous other movies that have been based on real tragedy in other parts of North America and the world, but God forbid you make it about something that happened here. People love to expouse the virtues of freedom, liberty and no censorship, but they sure change their minds quick when the shit hits home.
 
This is the closest I'm going to come to defending Karla Homolka, ever, but I think approaching the media the way she did was smart. She avoided mass media hysteria (and every Canadian journalist and his dog was there), and she also spoke directly to French Canada, which was also probably a good idea.

I don't think that makes her a better person, but I'm just saying that it makes sense.

(Full transcript: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050704.wtranscript0705/BNStory/Front)
 
she should get the death sentence along with bernado.. too bad canada is way to friggin leniant.. what a joke..

you can bash someones head in... and get "house arrest" where no one monitors you ..
 
I don't believe in captial punishment, unless it can be proven unequivocally that the person did the crime. Of course they've got the proof with these two, so I suppose that'd make 'em candidates in my world.

That interview was smart for her in one sense that she got to sell herself as some sort of hard done by person by Ontario, and doing the interview in French might've given her a bit more cushion where she'll be staying. But to anyone who knows what's up, she told on herself with remarkable ease for someone who is pretty intelligent.

I still hope that movie is released here...not because I want to see it (got zero interest to be honest), but I'm against censorship based on bullshit reasons. Let the public decide if they want to see it or not...no one's forcing anyone to go.
 
Shinobi said:
Agreed 100%. We've had 12 years to cry about this...going on and on about this now seems like closing the barn door after the horse as bolted. Particularly when there are hundreds of examples of people commiting the same sort of shit (or worse) getting the same amount of time (or less). And most of those people didn't even cut any deals.

Of course if I ever walked past her and she even glanced at me with a raised eyebrow, she'd be going through a window. I would hope I'd take my punishment like a man.

I have found it amusing how some politicians and other people don't want the movie based on these events to be released in Ontario. It's okay to show people drowning on a boat after it's hit an iceberg, or getting burned and butchered to death on a French coast line, or showing numerous other movies that have been based on real tragedy in other parts of North America and the world, but God forbid you make it about something that happened here. People love to expouse the virtues of freedom, liberty and no censorship, but they sure change their minds quick when the shit hits home.
Click to expand...

It's the fact she'd either score a media deal for her story, or if not, that someone in the film industry is making money of her infamy right when wounds are rawest.
 
Yeah, I guess the timing isn't the best in the world...should've done it a few years ago, or wait a few years after her release. Still, there's no good reason for the movie to be prevented from releasing here. These days box office bombs barely last three weeks at theatres anyway, and I'm pretty sure that'll be the case here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Jim Henson Stuff
36
2K
GloveSlap replied
MCU, I hate the damn TVA stuff.
42
4K
ManaByte replied
best AI to learn stuffs?
Community Business Science 
14
419
GigaBowser replied
Media Warned to Stop Stealing Stuff From Air Force One
9
2K
TDiddyLive replied
Suno AI - create your own songs, lyrics, music genre... amazing stuff!
9
2K
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Top Bottom