Off topic - The SC has ruled that we cannot extradite without a guarantee that the death penalty won't apply. Recently, a big news story, a Canadian citizen alleged killed his wife and has fled to Canada. I have a couple of questions:
1) Does Canada have any moral responsibility should a citizen fleeing a capital murder charge kill or injure someone while trying to reach Canada? Are we encouraging Canadians to flee home in order to escape the death penalty? Especially, are we encouraging them to kill again as they cannot get a more severe penalty than death, and making it to Canada, whatever the cost has a certain reward to it?
There is speculation that the man at the centre of this case fled for the express purpose of forcing a "no death penalty" deal when extradited.
2) What would Canada do if the US just said no, no deals? I know there was a lot of fear the US would do just that when the government refused to extradite Charles Ng without such guarantees. Can Canada hold an alleged murderer or try one in Canada for crimes committed in the US or would we simply have to free such a person? Because, frankly, were I an American prosecutor seeking the death penalty, especially for a heinous crime or serial killer, I would just say "fine, you keep him and good luck with that".
How freakin' naive are the SC judges? From a Wikipedia article on Rafay/Burns estradition
"There was also a concern about keeping dangerous criminals out of Canada, but the Court replied that criminals might not find extradition with the risk of a life sentence more attractive than the risk of execution, and thus it was not proven criminals would flee to Canada."
Rat -- good points and frankly it would make sense to flee to Canada rather than face a US death penalty. Although, the accused here is a good looking white guy and, with a few notable exceptions, such people seldom face the death penalty as a practical matter in the US. Besides, fleeing assuming rational thought, something often missing in murderers.
"I know there was a lot of fear the US would do just that when the government refused to extradite Charles Ng without such guarantees."
Charles Ng is currently on death row in California.
It was much later, at a time the liberal government was willing to extradite two alleged murderers without assurances the death penalty would be sought when the Supreme Court of Canada held the government must seek such assurances.
If Canada is responsible for any hypothetical murders committed by people trying to flee here to avoid teh death penalty (not that I have ever heard of any such thing ever happening), then the states that have the death penalty are responsible for every multiple murder that is committed in an attempt to avoid the death penalty for the first murder. God forbid witnesses are left hanging around...
WOW…I love this post. Most of the time supper for us is a big, big, big salad. There is often some left over, which is quite handy for lunch the next day.
We’re very fortunate to have an excellent healthy Fast Food chain here in South Africa (no trans fats, no preservatives, everything made fresh) and I love grabbing a green smoothie from them if I’m near one of them.
Gayle, I mispoke slightly, I should have said "When Ng fought exradition on death penalty grounds". The point still stands, which you would know if you were alive and conscious when this happened, what would happen if the US simply said "no"? If he had won, the US may well have said "keep him". How would you have felt with a murderer like him in Canada? And now that we do have the Supreme Court (over-ruling itself in Rafay-Burns) saying no extradition for death penalty, how exactly will Canada deal with a guy like Ng in the future? Do you have any constructive ideas? Or are you just happy Ng is on death row and not living down the street from you?
8 comments:
yummy, too cute. A health conscious bear :)
Daria S.
Off topic - The SC has ruled that we cannot extradite without a guarantee that the death penalty won't apply. Recently, a big news story, a Canadian citizen alleged killed his wife and has fled to Canada. I have a couple of questions:
1) Does Canada have any moral responsibility should a citizen fleeing a capital murder charge kill or injure someone while trying to reach Canada? Are we encouraging Canadians to flee home in order to escape the death penalty? Especially, are we encouraging them to kill again as they cannot get a more severe penalty than death, and making it to Canada, whatever the cost has a certain reward to it?
There is speculation that the man at the centre of this case fled for the express purpose of forcing a "no death penalty" deal when extradited.
2) What would Canada do if the US just said no, no deals? I know there was a lot of fear the US would do just that when the government refused to extradite Charles Ng without such guarantees. Can Canada hold an alleged murderer or try one in Canada for crimes committed in the US or would we simply have to free such a person? Because, frankly, were I an American prosecutor seeking the death penalty, especially for a heinous crime or serial killer, I would just say "fine, you keep him and good luck with that".
And addendum to my question:
How freakin' naive are the SC judges? From a Wikipedia article on Rafay/Burns estradition
"There was also a concern about keeping dangerous criminals out of Canada, but the Court replied that criminals might not find extradition with the risk of a life sentence more attractive than the risk of execution, and thus it was not proven criminals would flee to Canada."
Might not find . . .???
Rat -- good points and frankly it would make sense to flee to Canada rather than face a US death penalty. Although, the accused here is a good looking white guy and, with a few notable exceptions, such people seldom face the death penalty as a practical matter in the US. Besides, fleeing assuming rational thought, something often missing in murderers.
"I know there was a lot of fear the US would do just that when the government refused to extradite Charles Ng without such guarantees."
Charles Ng is currently on death row in California.
It was much later, at a time the liberal government was willing to extradite two alleged murderers without assurances the death penalty would be sought when the Supreme Court of Canada held the government must seek such assurances.
If Canada is responsible for any hypothetical murders committed by people trying to flee here to avoid teh death penalty (not that I have ever heard of any such thing ever happening), then the states that have the death penalty are responsible for every multiple murder that is committed in an attempt to avoid the death penalty for the first murder. God forbid witnesses are left hanging around...
WOW…I love this post. Most of the time supper for us is a big, big, big salad. There is often some left over, which is quite handy for lunch the next day.
We’re very fortunate to have an excellent healthy Fast Food chain here in South Africa (no trans fats, no preservatives, everything made fresh) and I love grabbing a green smoothie from them if I’m near one of them.
Gayle, I mispoke slightly, I should have said "When Ng fought exradition on death penalty grounds". The point still stands, which you would know if you were alive and conscious when this happened, what would happen if the US simply said "no"? If he had won, the US may well have said "keep him". How would you have felt with a murderer like him in Canada? And now that we do have the Supreme Court (over-ruling itself in Rafay-Burns) saying no extradition for death penalty, how exactly will Canada deal with a guy like Ng in the future? Do you have any constructive ideas? Or are you just happy Ng is on death row and not living down the street from you?
but so you think Flocke is fleeing with the carrots?
Ohh better not tell anyone you spotted her. shhhhh.
Daria
Post a Comment