BC girls murdered on Christmas /custody dispute

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread will be temporarily closed until Trinton's split personality stops spamming it. Thank you all for your pati3nce and understanding.
 
This story is so sad. I was wondering why the Father was charged with Second Degree Murder and not First Degree murder.
 
I don't know how that (criminal law) works. Perhaps first degree is planned/intentional which couldn't be proven.

I only hope that someone from the family or close friend doesn't go on the internet and somehow get rerouted to this thread. It would be very hurtful for them to read.

While we all can get very passionate about our positions/views, we should pause and consider the impact our words and arguments may have on those who read these posts in the future.
 
Last edited:
kate331 said:
This story is so sad. I was wondering why the Father was charged with Second Degree Murder and not First Degree murder.
Click to expand...

I found this description that helps explain the differences:

Sentencing for first degree murder is very simple. We do not have capital punishment in Canada so a person who is convicted of first degree murder is sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 25 years. The calculation for those 25 years begins when the person has been arrested and placed in custody, not when they are convicted and found guilty. There is no discretion on the part of the judge; that is the minimum sentence and it is automatic.

It is also important to know that, if you kill a police officer in the course of his duty, it is automatically a first degree charge even if it was not planned and deliberate. If you murder someone in a course of a sexual assault or forced confinement then the charge is also first degree and called constructive first degree murder. You may not have planned it and deliberated about it, but if in the course of a sexual assault, confinement or a kidnapping the victim ends up dying and you are responsible for their death, it is deemed to be first degree murder.

Second degree murder is defined as all other murder other than first degree murder. So, if you do not plan and you do not deliberate about it but you still intend to kill someone, that is second degree murder. The sentencing ranges from life in jail with no parole for 10 years to 25 years until you are eligible for parole. If there are mitigating factors the jury can recommend the minimum.
Click to expand...

So they may have determined it was a crime of passion, or an impulsive action rather than a preplanned decision.

Source: The Distinction Between First And Second Degree Murder And Manslaughter | Lawyershop
 
What’s also sad is that going through an acrimonious custody dispute is one of the well known risk factors for domestic homicide. There are about 25 risk factors identified by the death review committe who researched actual cases of domestic homicide in Ontario and BC and found these common risk factors. They include:
Separation or divorce proceedings
Stepchild in the family
Substance abuse
Mental illness/brain injury
Death threats
Destruction of property or threats
Kidnaping/forced isolation
Threats or actually harming pets
Unemployment
Physical assault
Assault or threat with a weapon including knives
Choking the spouse or children

These are but a few of the risks which family court sweep under the rug. This is because in family court “the best interests of the children “ only includes access to both parents, it does not include keeping them alive. Criminal court is concerned with punishment and prevention therefor put controls in place such as no drinking and restraining orders. Family court makes the assumption that every parent is a loving parent including the convicted axe murderer who at the very least should have supervised access because it’s in the best interests of the children!
 
Last edited:
While completely disagreeing with the whole tone of Triton comments concerning this tragic event, I can see where the incredible stress of divorce, support, CS, parental alienation, ex-spouse bitching, constant lawyer and costs, coupled with denying access to children, job loss, debt, fatigue, and powerlessness could snap a mind.

Of course, most people don't flip out completely and commit such acts, but there are examples of both men and women who, when stressed beyond their endurance, break inside and their disturbed mind becomes a living reality.

It is a sad thing all around, especially since a lot of the factors could of been avoided with commonsense and fairer laws, wants, and desires.

IMHO.....
 
Perhaps the mods can close this and start a new thread "going over the edge" or something.

I have a difficult time with people attempting to diagnose perpetrators of the heinous crime cited at the start of this thread. We don't know the details and likely never will.
 
As stated, my opinion only.....and there could be other factors, including evil, I suppose. I will stand by my point of view as a valid version until and if we learn more. Which I doubt we will.

But you are right, this thread is now going nowhere as it is all water under the bridge.
 
I agree that some of the post were too harsh and upsetting, but I think its worth a discussion to educate on how to prevent these horrific crimes for the future. A lot of the members here know first hand how stressful Family Law can be.

Of course we will probably never know the full truth and can only gain our knowledge through the news media. I read that he also had a gambling problem which could have contributed more towards his debt than paying child support.

Also this could be a lesson for Child Services, as to why he was with the children in his apartment after the electricity had been cut off. Can u even imagine trying to make a special Christmas for your children with no electricity?

Ian Mulgrew: Social services and the courts fail another B.C. family | Vancouver Sun

As Stillbreathing explained in her post, this could be a lesson to all of us to keep a more careful eye and ear out to our neighbours and loved one.
 
kate331 said:
Of course we will probably never know the full truth and can only gain our knowledge through the news media. I read that he also had a gambling problem which could have contributed more towards his debt than paying child support.
Click to expand...

In a couple of years when it goes to trial, we'll learn more. And if he's convicted, we'll learn even more in a decade or two when he is eligible for parole.

kate331 said:
Also this could be a lesson for Child Services, as to why he was with the children in his apartment after the electricity had been cut off. Can u even imagine trying to make a special Christmas for your children with no electricity?
Click to expand...

I would speculate that he didn't tell anybody, for fear his access with the children would be removed. Think of what would be the likely scenario:

Dad: I lost my job, I'm being evicted and my power got cutoff.
Mom: I'll take the kids until you get a new job and find a new place. Don't forget to keep paying CS though.
Dad: (months later) I have a new job and a new place. I want my access back.
Mom: Nope! Status quo!

Of course, there are many co-parents who would handle things much more reasonably, but it's obvious this pair were not that sort.

kate331 said:
As Stillbreathing explained in her post, this could be a lesson to all of us to keep a more careful eye and ear out to our neighbours and loved one.
Click to expand...

We are in an awful place right now in society, I think. Despite feminism's progress, many stereotypes still remain for the roles of men and women when it comes to earning money and raising children. It's going to take more than looking out for our neighbours; it's going to take teaching boys parenting skills from childhood and encouraging them to have deep friendships beyond their family so they have a support network in adulthood.

I suspect this man had nobody he was close enough to that he felt able to seek support or help from. He felt unable to reach out for help when his problems began, much less when they spiraled out of his control. When people feel out of control, they take drastic measures.

And yes, while there have been similar tragedies caused by women, they are more often perpetrated by men, who feel more aggression due to greater testosterone, AND have less social support in times of crisis.
 
Last edited:
Rioe said:
Iit's going to take teaching boys parenting skills from childhood and encouraging them to have deep friendships beyond their family so they have a support network in adulthood.
.
Click to expand...

And why precisely is this something that we only need to teach boys and not girls ? Is it just a skewed mindset we have of men as a society?
 
tunnelight said:
And why precisely is this something that we only need to teach boys and not girls ? Is it just a skewed mindset we have of men as a society?
Click to expand...

I do consider that society already teaches girls parenting skills far more than boys, yes. "No, dolls are for girls, here's a truck" and so on. Boys are still (generally) discouraged from learning nurturing skills. We still (generally) also teach boys to bottle up their feelings, to fear being perceived as weak if they admit they need help, and to homophobically avoid close emotional platonic friendships with other men.

Many men have only vague ideas how to parent because they have not often been exposed to those skills until having a baby, and then their wife probably does most of the work, which she learned as a child playing with dolls, as a teenage babysitter, and from her close friends who are already moms. Additionally, men rely far more on their spouse than on their male friends to provide all their emotional support, while women have a network of female friends. So, when a marriage ends, compared with the mom, the dad is left with poorer parenting skills AND less support available from his friends.

Yes, I'm generalizing badly, and there are wonderful exceptional men (just as there are terrible exceptional women), but on the whole, we still have a lot of work to make them the norm. I hesitate to call myself a feminist on this forum because of the anti-male perception that goes along with it these days, but this is one of the main pillars of feminism: that boys/men and girls/women be afforded the same opportunities. This includes providing boys with the skills to be capable parents and expecting it from them when they are men.
 
CTV news has an article about this case and that it raises questions about family court judges and domestic violence. I don’t know how to copy and paste it here to share with you.

It basically states what I have been saying in my other posts. That domestic homicide is the most predictable and therefore most preventable homicide. 80% of victims are the mother, 10% children and 10% the father. They also go on to say that judges are inadequately trained and dismiss the warning signs and patterns that indicate those at serious risk. The child protection and social services as well as the family courts regularly fail these familys in distress!

I feel this is because in family court every single allegation is considered a false allegation. Even those allegations backed up by written documentation and evidence from multiple professional and third party sources is minimized. The maximum contact principle needs to be kicked out of first place and the keep them alive principle needs to be at the top! First priority needs to be keeping the children alive which includes feeding them, providing the necessities of life and preventing them from being murdered. The fact that you can’t have access if a child is dead seems to escape family court judges over and over again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top