Sex, Lies, Videotape . . .
A judge in Toronto has permitted the release to the media of a tape on which Paul Bernardo, convicted of two murders and numerous sexual assaults (as the Scarborough Rapist) is interviewed regarding the disappearance of University of Toronto student Elizabeth Bain in June 1990.
Bain's body was never found; her boyfriend Robert Baltovich was tried several times before the crown threw up its hands in exasperation and told the court they had no evidence with which to go forward. On April 22, 2008, he was acquitted. (The events are much more convoluted but easy to find.)
One of Baltovich's points all along was that the police should have looked at Paul Bernardo, who was in full rapist mode in 1990 and soon would turn to killing, at the instigation of his then-wife, Karla Homolka.
Homolka manipulated everyone who came in contact with her, told lies about her involvement, signed a deal with prosecutors which should have been revoked on the grounds that she withheld crucial material evidence - the existence of a number of videotapes documenting not just Bernardo's activities, but her own.
Then there were the kneeprints of a small person, on the backs of the two victims.
Then there was the attack on Homolka which signalled the end of their enterprise - an attack so brutal one would think it must have had a terrible trigger. Could it have been that - as Bernardo has steadfastly maintained - he came home with pizza for his second live sex toy, only to discover that his wife, out of jealousy, had strangled her rival - again???
Homolka served twelve years, did not take parole and thus was not monitored by anyone once she was freed, had a baby and moved with her new partner to the Antilles. And is laughing all the way to the beach, I'm sure.
Bernardo, meanwhile, as a "dangerous offender", is locked up 23 hours of the day. This enforced inactivity is probably as effective as castration; he sits and watches TV in a cell that is about the size of a walk-in closet in the typical lower middle class tract house.
Two years ago Bernardo sent a letter to the Attorney General of Ontario in which he detailed further crimes that he had committed. There was mention of rapes, but no murders. Then, exactly one year ago, he was interviewed in connection with Elizabeth Bain.
Much of Bernardo's anger - there was plenty in the transcript, already released, much of it justified - revolves around this point:
After he wrote the 2006 letter, police decided that he committed two of the crimes but that, when he recounted the other assaults, he was lying.
It now is recorded in his file that he is, among all hisother defects, a liar.
Which, as he rightly pointed out, can and will be used to bolster whichever opinion the authorities may wish to use in the future, if - when - they decide to try him again.
Are you of the persuasion that it is acceptable to release videotaped interviews of people who are not subsequently charged with a crime - let alone tried?
Then put yourself into that place.
Human beings, being the open-minded, thoughtful creatures that we are, will look at an interview tape and decide - that guy's twitching, he did it - or - she's so cute! she can't possibly have knifed someone to death.
Videotaped interviews are exceedingly prejudicial at the best of times apart from which they don't necessarily achieve anything.
Judge David McCombs's ruling is wrong - I don't believe society is well served by the public's being able to see any videotaped interview with anyone brought in for questioning - particularly if that person is not then charged with any crime. We are, after all, admonished constantly to regard everyone as innocent until proven otherwise.
I won't be surprised when this case reaches the Supreme Court of Canada. This ruling opens the door to all sorts of misuse and unintended consequences.
c2008 bluemlein.blogspot.com
Bain's body was never found; her boyfriend Robert Baltovich was tried several times before the crown threw up its hands in exasperation and told the court they had no evidence with which to go forward. On April 22, 2008, he was acquitted. (The events are much more convoluted but easy to find.)
One of Baltovich's points all along was that the police should have looked at Paul Bernardo, who was in full rapist mode in 1990 and soon would turn to killing, at the instigation of his then-wife, Karla Homolka.
Homolka manipulated everyone who came in contact with her, told lies about her involvement, signed a deal with prosecutors which should have been revoked on the grounds that she withheld crucial material evidence - the existence of a number of videotapes documenting not just Bernardo's activities, but her own.
Then there were the kneeprints of a small person, on the backs of the two victims.
Then there was the attack on Homolka which signalled the end of their enterprise - an attack so brutal one would think it must have had a terrible trigger. Could it have been that - as Bernardo has steadfastly maintained - he came home with pizza for his second live sex toy, only to discover that his wife, out of jealousy, had strangled her rival - again???
Homolka served twelve years, did not take parole and thus was not monitored by anyone once she was freed, had a baby and moved with her new partner to the Antilles. And is laughing all the way to the beach, I'm sure.
Bernardo, meanwhile, as a "dangerous offender", is locked up 23 hours of the day. This enforced inactivity is probably as effective as castration; he sits and watches TV in a cell that is about the size of a walk-in closet in the typical lower middle class tract house.
Two years ago Bernardo sent a letter to the Attorney General of Ontario in which he detailed further crimes that he had committed. There was mention of rapes, but no murders. Then, exactly one year ago, he was interviewed in connection with Elizabeth Bain.
Much of Bernardo's anger - there was plenty in the transcript, already released, much of it justified - revolves around this point:
After he wrote the 2006 letter, police decided that he committed two of the crimes but that, when he recounted the other assaults, he was lying.
It now is recorded in his file that he is, among all hisother defects, a liar.
Which, as he rightly pointed out, can and will be used to bolster whichever opinion the authorities may wish to use in the future, if - when - they decide to try him again.
Are you of the persuasion that it is acceptable to release videotaped interviews of people who are not subsequently charged with a crime - let alone tried?
Then put yourself into that place.
Human beings, being the open-minded, thoughtful creatures that we are, will look at an interview tape and decide - that guy's twitching, he did it - or - she's so cute! she can't possibly have knifed someone to death.
Videotaped interviews are exceedingly prejudicial at the best of times apart from which they don't necessarily achieve anything.
Judge David McCombs's ruling is wrong - I don't believe society is well served by the public's being able to see any videotaped interview with anyone brought in for questioning - particularly if that person is not then charged with any crime. We are, after all, admonished constantly to regard everyone as innocent until proven otherwise.
I won't be surprised when this case reaches the Supreme Court of Canada. This ruling opens the door to all sorts of misuse and unintended consequences.
c2008 bluemlein.blogspot.com
Labels: Elizabeth Bain, Judge David McCombs, Paul Bernardo, Robert Baltovich, videotape
posted by bluemlein at Tuesday, June 10, 2008
1 Comments:
Thank heavens, it's about time someone said this.I have been putting myself in Bernardo's place for over a year now, since I first started investigating this absurd case. I am semi-retired now, but I've worked in counseling almost 20 years; I've watched that clip repeatedly, and I see a man who's told the same story consistently, and been called a liar, while the "other party" told whopping lies, and was believed. Good job, bluemlein.
Post a Comment
<< Home