Convicted Child Molestor Running for School Board
Sun, 2003-10-19 12:57
#1
Convicted Child Molestor Running for School Board
Sun, 2003-10-19 12:57
#2
[url=http://canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/story.asp?id=1DB10C0A-7224-484F-... Assault Convictions Dog Catholic School Board Candidate[/url]
Unbelievable. Actually, no I take that back. It IS believable given the society we live in that he is allowed to run for the Catholic School Board and that he began teaching again in 1984 in B.C., Alberta and in Saskatchewan. This article doesn't mention that, but the one in the Regina Leader-Post says, "His teaching licence was suspended for 16 months and he became legally certified to teach again in 1984."
Does anyone else find this disturbing/frustrating?
Why are child molestors getting away with these things? He hasn't even admitted that he was at fault here. He DID plead guilty, but he said, he only pleaded guilty because he was persuaded to do so by senior clergy of the church.
Sun, 2003-10-19 13:26
#3
Why don't we have a sex offender registry, we have a gun registry.
Tue, 2003-10-21 17:05
#4
quote:
Why are child molestors getting away with these things?
What is he getting away with? The article said that he spent 18 months in prison after convicted in 1981.
The article also says he received a full pardon from the federal Solicitor General in 1994.
I question the timing and motives of the other trustees in bringing this information to the attention of the media at this time.
Tue, 2003-10-21 17:57
#5
What is he getting away with???
I don't think his punishment was nearly enough. He was allowed to teach again. I don't think he should have been allowed to - would you trust him with your daughters?
These girls will be affected for the REST of their lives, while this man is allowed to have his career back, and run for the school board. In the meantime, while given the chance at another position of authority, these girls might wonder why he is still able to get on with his life as though nothing happened after he did such a horrible thing to them.
You can argue that he deserves a second chance. But those girls didn't get a second chance. We're supposed to be protecting our children from men like this, not the other way around and certainly not giving them the means (i.e. allowing him to teach again) to possibly molest another school girl.
Tue, 2003-10-21 18:03
#6
You don't have a sex offender registry in Canada?
Tue, 2003-10-21 18:10
#7
Nope. While no reason has been given on why the governing Liberals have repeatedly defeated Alliance bills to create one, I am of the opinion that it has something to do with the PM's son being a sex offender.
Tue, 2003-10-21 23:26
#8
quote:
I don't think his punishment was nearly enough. He was allowed to teach again. I don't think he should have been allowed to - would you trust him with your daughters?
Was his punishment enough? That's debatable. It seems appropriate to me. Since so much time has passed, I would probably trust him with my daughters.
quote:
These girls will be affected for the REST of their lives, while this man is allowed to have his career back, and run for the school board.
I'm not discrediting the trauma that these girls must have gone through. Terrible.
quote:
You can argue that he deserves a second chance. But those girls didn't get a second chance. We're supposed to be protecting our children from men like this, not the other way around and certainly not giving them the means (i.e. allowing him to teach again) to possibly molest another school girl.
I don't think he should have been allowed to return to teaching while he had that particular criminal record. He should however be allowed to return to his life after doing his time. He committed his crimes some 30 years ago. How long do we continue to persecute him for his indiscretions (crimes) in the 70's?
What would satisfy you? That he be publicly lynched? Should he be allowed to work in a deli where there might be kids? Where does it stop?
Tue, 2003-10-21 23:53
#9
I would like to know the full meaning of a pardon?
Can all past convicts recieve a pardon? Can any crime be pardoned?
I find the whole thing very vague. Did he do it or not?
Wed, 2003-10-22 00:02
#10
I'm not sure what the pardon means either. Whether it means the government admits it made a mistake or whether it is something available to all convicts after some time to allow them to move on with their lives. I just don't know.
Wed, 2003-10-22 00:22
#11
A pardon is not an admission on the part of the government that you were innocent. Pardons are given to people (not sure if you have to be a first offender) who have shown that they been rehabilitated, have spent something like 5 years without reoffending, and it's basically a chance to start fresh without a criminal record. It's there for people who make a mistake, put it behind them, and do not reoffend. Our lawyer babblers will be able to correct anything I am wrong about.
That said, I'm surprised that a child molester can get a pardon. I don't know enough about the pardon system to know what the criteria are, but you'd think violent offenders wouldn't be able to get pardons. I don't know though.
Wed, 2003-10-22 00:42
#12
Maybe Jeff would know. I find it a bit peculiar too.
Wed, 2003-10-22 01:07
#13
He doesn't have his offenses of the 70's on his criminal record anymore since he has been granted a pardon, no matter what the reason for the pardon. This sounds like a smear campaign.
Wed, 2003-10-22 01:18
#14
quote:
He doesn't have his offenses of the 70's on his criminal record anymore since he has been granted a pardon, no matter what the reason for the pardon. This sounds like a smear campaign.
Yeah but it has been made public.
quote:
Hall, 57, was sentenced to 18 months in jail in July 1981, after pleading guilty in Regina Court of Queen's Bench to two charges of having sexual intercourse with females aged 14 to 16 and two charges of indecent assault of females.Hall was a schoolteacher at the time of the offences, which took place between 1974 and 1980 in Regina, Swift Current and Melfort.
This is the confusion. Everyone knows. He was convicted. Was he wrongfully convicted? Very vague.
Wed, 2003-10-22 08:12
#15
I don't know. A past child molesting conviction seems relevant to me when it comes to voting for someone for school trustee. If it were a drunk driving conviction, then sure, that would be irrelevant. But putting someone who has molested children in charge of running schools - I don't think so. I know it was a long time ago, and maybe he hasn't reoffended, but let's face it - if he had embezzled a million dollars twenty years ago, people would consider that relevant if the guy were appointed Finance Minister or some other position of trust that involves being in charge of a lot of money.
Wed, 2003-10-22 12:17
#16
The underlying question is whether this conviction really does suggest the man involved could not be a good trustee.
Pardons are available to anyone who is completely rehabilitated. (I don't have time to check the precise wording of the Criminal Records Act, sorry.)
When you apply for a pardon, a full investigation is done to determine whether or not
there is any evidence of continued danger to the public, and also a weighing of what positive information concerning rehabilitation does exist.
I think this is a hard case. I can understand parents being unwilling to trust the Mountie investigation concerning rehabilitation.
Obviously, though, it is always "safest" to pretend that no one is ever rehabilitated, and if they presented a danger in 1980, then they must still present a danger. This mindset occurs most often with respect to parole, where the public iften thinks "why risk it?" In this case, though, we are talking, not about liberty, but the capacity to serve in a public office.
If I had to decide about this, I would ask myself whether a school trustee actually spends time alone with kids at all. If they don't, there can be no problem. Voting on a budget doesn't really present much of a risk. If the job of a trustee includes being closeted with kids sometimes, I might want to check into the recent doings of this individual before supporting him.
Wed, 2003-10-22 18:46
#17
[url=http://canada.com/search/story.aspx?id=138ea635-0753-43d2-94fb-125516bed... Irate Man Able To Run For School Board[/url]
quote:
The woman who says she was impregnated when she was 15 by Saskatoon Catholic school board candidate Denis Hall is angry that Hall denies his crime and that he is still involved with youth through sports."I went through hell to put him in jail to protect society and our community and he's still out there," the woman said in a telephone interview.
"I'm very angry that he has denied it and he is still affecting young girls' lives," she said.
Tue, 2003-10-28 17:51
#18
The same problems occur for the release of any violent offender. There seems to be a high incidence of repeating violations. I don't personally belive many change their ways. For some I would approve of castration, for others permanent incarceration. We are too much concerned with offenders's rights and not enough with protecting society. e.g. in the US the Miranda rule works as follows: you are read your rights if you commit a crime; ergo the criminal has rights but the innocent do not.
Tue, 2003-10-28 18:15
#19
quote:
you are read your rights if you commit a crime; ergo the criminal has rights
Oh, and here I thought that anyone arrested, whether guilty or innocent, had a right to be informed of his/her rights.
Ergo, everyone has rights.
Fri, 2007-06-15 06:52
#20
writer
justice
Mon, 2011-12-26 03:18
#21
Mon, 2011-12-26 10:38
#22
Mon, 2011-12-26 10:51
#23
Mon, 2011-12-26 10:51
#24
Wed, 2011-12-28 14:28
#25
Hello, I am new. By way of introduction, let me just say that I am somewhat of a conspiracy theorist. You know.......International Rothschilds bankers rule the world, the US government was in on 9/11....whacky stuff like that. One thing I firmly believe is that the number of people out there who want to have sex with children is way higher than we would like to believe. And many of these evil people have attained positions of great wealth, power and influence. That's why the penalties for child molestation are so pathetically low - they have many many brothers in spirit in the House of Commons, the Senate, on corporate boards and sitting on the benches in our courts.