A despicable ruling by Quebec Appeals Court: Re pedophile father

[Hoping4Change]

A father who began raping his 24 month old daughter and continued to do so for two years AND filmed his rapes to make child pornography had his sentence reduced by the Quebec Court of Appeals from 15 years to nine years.

The court ruled that "this wasn't among the worst sexual assaults that have ever been committed."

I am sickened to death by their reasoning.:mad:

Justice Lise Cote wrote:

" "There was no violence, such as gagging, threatening or hitting the child,"

Even though the child had said in a videotaped statement that her father put his penis in her vagina and there was blood when he pulled it out, there was no medical evidence to show there had been penetration, the judge wrote.

She said the man, a father of four who was found guilty in March 2005 of sexual assault and using his daughter to possess, produce and distribute child pornography, shouldn't be given the maximum sentence given his young age - 32 - and lack of criminal record, other than a sexual assault of another child when he was 17 years old.

...


In rendering the original sentence in November, Judge Dominique Wilhelmy said she had enough evidence to declare the unrepentant pedophile a dangerous offender, which would have kept him behind bars indefinitely.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=95f9edbe-22bf-4bd7-9e64-8ddb968e5c22&k=96469

:mad:

[bloom]

1. It wasn't that long ago

that rapists were getting the death penalty.

What is up with reduced sentences? Why would judges think that this is what is in the interests of society? More concern for the rapists than the victims. :puke:

I have to wonder about the acceptance of porn and esp. violent porn and possible connections to attitudes about rape sentences.

Around here - such a person (child molester/pornographer) got 100 years. That's more like it AFAIC.

[Hoping4Change]

2. I agree with you that someone like that should be given 100 years.

I can't comprehend that the appeal judges believe that what he did wasn't violent. One thing I just recalled from a report I heard on the CBC yesterday is that the Crown Attorneys are hoping to find grounds to bring this case to the Supreme Court.

There is something bizarre about how judges here in Canada treat pedophiles. A teacher in Toronto who had been abusing his students for years was given house arrest because the judge said he had a bad heart but outside the Court House he was filmed running at full steam away from reporters with bag over his head.

There are just endless stories of the police spending years tracking horrific child porn cases only to judeges give the offenders slap on the wrist.

[Arkansas Granny]

3. This is just unbelievable. The rape of a 24 month old child should

be considered violent enough to keep this man (and I use that term loosely) in prison for the rest of his life, IMO. It doesn't matter if there was no gagging or hitting, she was totally helpless and unable to defend herself against any of his actions.

[Hoping4Change]

5. What isn't violent about a vaginal penetration of a 2 yr old?

I'm with you, Its unbelievable.

[donsu]

4. I'm wondering if Justice Lise Cote is a victum herself?

nt

[amitten]

6. Three words: Cut. It. Off.

Yes, I am serious.

[Taxloss]

8. I'm sure you're serious, but it wouldn't help.

Castration, even full emasculation, is actually pointless against pathological offenders of this kind - they are still completely capable of re-offending.

[amitten]

9. Maybe. But I thnk they would find it far less tempting.

Cut it off.

[Taxloss]

7. Incredible. Sick, and incredible.

So, the child gets a life sentence and the abuser nine years.