NationStates Jolt Archive

How long will this nasty piece of work (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Homolka) live after her release from jail?

To make a long story short, Karla Homolka plea bargained herself a 12 year sentence for her complicitiy in the rape, toture and murder of 3 girls. AFTER the plea bargain was sealed, videotapes of the crimes came to light, showing her to be a full participant. Most Canadaians were outraged at this travesty of justice and many still are. I think someone is going to take things into their own hands and off the bitch at the earliest convenient moment. So how long do think she'll live now that she's been released?

Just check the appropriate box on the poll, and vent your hate in for Krazy Karla in your posts. Yes, Murder is bad, and vigilante executions of twisted pyschopaths is also wrong....just not as much.

I've heard some people really worked themselves into a lather over this one. I've encountered this once or twice before, but years ago, now.

I guess I'm surprised at how long people can let their rage quietly simmer. This Homolka thingy never really made a huge impact on me, though. Not that I'm uncaring for those victimized, it just didn't loom large in my thoughts at the time, or recently, either.

Hey, the Crown was dumb enough to feel they needed to hash out a deal with her - but I've never heard anyone blast the Crown. They had ample evidence to put Bernardo away forever without Homolka's testimony. Why'd they bother making deals?

Anyway, she's not going to be lynched. That's pure fantasy speaking. She'll dot every 'i' and cross every 't' as set forth in her release agreement, and at her earliest convenience, try to blend back in with society. Like everyone else getting out of jail. If it's all too upsetting, maybe this non-existant lynchmob shouldn't be going after her with pitchforks, but maybe the lawyers for the Crown instead.

I actually don't want to see my prediction of her getting offed by another nutjob. You have to be quite sick yourself to see murder as an appropriate solution to justice gone wrong. But I honestly think that the lather people have gotten themselves into over this makes it quite likely that at some point someone will try and possibly succeed in killing Karla Homolka. Hopefully she'l just blend in as you said, and not repeat hher crimes. Preferably while working as an outhouse cleaner for minimum wage, but nonetheless alive and free.


Maybe Paul Bernardo's defense attorney, who hid the existence of the tapes for quite some time, would be the best one to lay blame upon for the mess that happened. Then again, he was just doing his job, as were the prosecutors who accepted the plea bargain.

if she had raped and killed in Singapore or Iran...justice would have been delivered.

Canadian Justice is Laughable.

if she had raped and killed in Singapore or Iran...justice would have been delivered.

Canadian Justice is Laughable.

Yeah, Iran and Singapore definite set the bar nations should strive for. :rolleyes:

Such bloodlust is sickening.

Reading the Wikipedia article (and confirming it with some Google searches) the outrage over Ms. Homolka's sentence is itself outrageous.

As the Wikipedia article makes clear, it is a myth that the home videos were discovered after the plea-bargain had been fixed. Prosecutors had an opportunity to both "break the deal" and charge Homolka with additional crimes for a period of 8 months between the finding of the tapes and the agreement not to charge her with additional crimes.

The young woman (17-22 during the events in question) was already the victim of severe domestic violence:

Homolka herself was subjected to the violence of her husband and in 1993 decided to leave him after an incident which left her hospitalized. The attending ER physician called her injuries "the worst case of wife assault I have seen." Homolka had been left with two black eyes and a hemorrhage in the left eye from strikes to the back of her head which drove the brain forward into her skull. She suffered a contusion to the forehead, bruises down the side of her neck and along her arms, bruises and swelling to 75% of her legs from the mid-thigh down and a puncture wound from a screwdriver on her right thigh above the knee.

It was the belief of the Crown -- well-supported by the evidence -- that Ms. Holmolka was a "compliant victim" who participated in her husband's crimes as a result of his abuse. During her imprisonment Karla received psychological evaluations from at least seven different psychologists who all agreed that she exhibited the symptoms of "severe clinical depression, battered spousal syndrome and post traumatic stress disorder," for all of which she has been treated while in prison.

Even so, her participation in the crimes of her husband was not simply excused. Her sentence was the result of plea bargain in which she cooperated with the authorities and testified against her husband. She received a 12-year sentence. And she has served the full 12 years in prison.

Having served her full sentence she is being released, but she is also subject to severe restrictions and monitoring. She was placed under Section 810.2 of the Canada Criminal Code, which does, among other things, prohibit Homolka from contacting convicted sex offenders, using illegal drugs, or spending protracted amounts of time with youths in addition to requiring her to keep the local police informed of her general activities such as her place of residence and employment.

She was directly evaluated by doctors Hans Arndt, Alan Long, Andrew Malcom, Chris Hatcher, Stephen Hucker, Peter Jaffe and Angus McDonald, all of whom were in agreement on her diagnosis as a battered wife suffering from severe clinical depression and post traumatic stress disorder. Dr. Sharon Williams, an expert on incarcerated sex offenders and psychopaths, who evaluated her between 1996 and 1999, concluded that Karla Homolka was not a psychopath, and not likely to reoffend. In 2005, during Karla's 810.2 release hearing, Psychiatrist Louis Morrisette said the 35-year-old did not represent a threat to society.

Ms. Homolka took nearly every recommended course and treatment (with the aforementioned exception) during her incarceration, such as "Improving Your Inner Self", "Anger Management", "Survivors of Abuse and Trauma", and many more. She also earned her bachelor's degree in psychology from Queen's University, and achieved very high grades.

Ms. Homolka has expressed remorse for her crimes numerous times; most notably to her family in a letter to them regarding the death of her sister Tammy, and to the doctors treating her throughout the years. In letters to one of her previous psychiatrists, she described at length the continuing nightmares she had about the two murdered girls.

This woman (who was young at the time) was both a victim and a perpetrator. She cooperated with authorities and has served a full sentence of 12 years in prison. She will continue to be monitored and restricted. She has paid and is paying for her role as a perpetrator.

Enough is enough.

EDIT: 1. It is also a myth that Ms. Homolka is a psychopath. She is not.

2. I object to this poll and the tone of the opening post. I nonetheless posted to at least partially set the record straight.

3. I am glad, Downarching Void, that you made it clear you do not advocate vigilantism or hope for harm to come to Ms. Homolka.

<beating me to the punch and being more thorough>
I'll get you, Gadget!!!

EDIT: What he said...sort of pointless to have two of the same one right after the other....

OH! I was going to say that great minds think alike!

Meh, if no-one arranged to have her whacked while she was in the can, I doubt anything will happen after she is released.

After all, it is far easier to have someone killed while they are in prison.

I just think it's stupid that she was allowed to get a degree while in prison for free while I have to work my ass off to pay for mine.

And no wonder she got high grades, she doesn't have anything else to do.

It is also a myth that Ms. Homolka is a psychopath. She is not.

Psychopath: Defined as "A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse" (emphasis mine).

This woman participated in the drugging, rape and murder of her own baby sister and has shown no remorse for her actions, instead trying to pin it on her husband. To me that indicates that she is indeed psychopathic.

Psychopath: Defined as "A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse" (emphasis mine).

This woman participated in the drugging, rape and murder of her own baby sister and has shown no remorse for her actions, instead trying to pin it on her husband. To me that indicates that she is indeed psychopathic.
Did you read the wikipedia article?

Of all the psychologists who examined her, none said she was a psychopath... and these people would be able to tell...

Also, as stated in the wikipedia article, she has expressed remorse.

See, more like a psychopath would be the girl who got my bf's little brother killed. She laughed on the witness stand and joked with her attorney, saying that she didn't regret it and would do it again. And she won't get any time becuase she was a juvinile when it happened and isn't anymore. She might actually get to drive again. <-- That is more fucked up about the canadian justice system than this is.

Cat-Tribe: Maybe you'd feel outraged over this case if you had been the same age as the girls when they were murdered, while the police were desperately hunting for whomever was responsible. It had a very strong impact on the atmosphere of my high school, caused quite a bit of ugly paranoia.

People have a hard enough time understanding and accepting sufferers of extreme mental illnesses such as Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder, so their lack of understanding of a much more complex situation (such as Homolka's) should come as no surprise. Outrage over the case itself leads to disregard over the details. They see, rightly or wrongly, a woman who helped her husband commit heinous crimes, and thus deserving of the fullest punishment possible. Personally, I don't agree with the sentence she was given, I think it was arrived at under false pretences. Karla bloody well knew those tapes existed, and eventually so did the prosecution. The real catcher for people who call her a psychopath is that she could have walked away and gone to the police about it. You can point to battered woman syndrome as the key motivator for her actions, but I'd rather lay the blame squarely where it belongs, at the feet of a society that fails to really empower people of any gender with the courage to refuse to be oppressed.

Psychopath: Defined as "A person with an antisocial personality disorder, manifested in aggressive, perverted, criminal, or amoral behavior without empathy or remorse" (emphasis mine).

This woman participated in the drugging, rape and murder of her own baby sister and has shown no remorse for her actions, instead trying to pin it on her husband. To me that indicates that she is indeed psychopathic.

You are wrong in two ways:

1. She has shown remorse. Repeatedly.

2. She has been evaluated by at least 9 psychiatrists -- including one that specializes in sex offenders and psychopaths -- and none have concluded she is a psychopath. To the contrary, they have found she is not. No trained psychiatric professional that has treated or interviewed her directly has called her a psychopath.

The crimes in which she participated were horrorific, true. So was the abuse she was subjected to. She suffered from battered spouse syndrome and was a compliant victim of her husband. That is not just her version. Those are the facts.

She didn't "try to pin it on her husband." The police and the prosecutors believed -- based on all the evidence -- that her husband was the primary one responsible. Apparently there is evidence he committed rapes and murders entirely apart from her -- while she committed no crimes alone.

She was punished commensurate with her degree of culpability and with her cooperation with the authorities.

Cat-Tribe: Maybe you'd feel outraged over this case if you had been the same age as the girls when they were murdered, while the police were desperately hunting for whomever was responsible. It had a very strong impact on the atmosphere of my high school, caused quite a bit of ugly paranoia.
[snip]

Nope. I'm not exactly that age, but I can't seem to care.

Nope. I'm not exactly that age, but I can't seem to care.

I meant @ the time they occured. If you're 14 or 15 now, you wouldn't even have been pre-school age when these things happened.

Some have objected to my language in the intial post. I was expressing my own views of her, should've made clearer and with less potty mouth. Sorry bout that. I'm going to ask the mods to change the thread title, its to flippant towards another persons life. I'd like to point out though that when I participate in a deadpool IRL, its only over people I don't want to see dead, just ones I think may become so in the next year or two.

I meant @ the time they occured. If you're 14 or 15 now, you wouldn't even have been pre-school age when these things happened.
Oh. Well, you think I'd care about rapists of 14, 15 year olds in general, right? Only, I don't.

Cat-Tribe: Maybe you'd feel outraged over this case if you had been the same age as the girls when they were murdered, while the police were desperately hunting for whomever was responsible. It had a very strong impact on the atmosphere of my high school, caused quite a bit of ugly paranoia.

People have a hard enough time understanding and accepting sufferers of extreme mental illnesses such as Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder, so their lack of understanding of a much more complex situation (such as Homolka's) should come as no surprise. Outrage over the case itself leads to disregard over the details. They see, rightly or wrongly, a woman who helped her husband commit heinous crimes, and thus deserving of the fullest punishment possible. Personally, I don't agree with the sentence she was given, I think it was arrived at under false pretences. Karla bloody well knew those tapes existed, and eventually so did the prosecution. The real catcher for people who call her a psychopath is that she could have walked away and gone to the police about it. You can point to battered woman syndrome as the key motivator for her actions, but I'd rather lay the blame squarely where it belongs, at the feet of a society that fails to really empower people of any gender with the courage to refuse to be oppressed.

You state alot of mixed things about the case. Which I understand -- it may cause you mixed emotions.

I understand that cases like this cause a great deal of hysteria and paranoia.

And, as you say and demonstrate, people do not understand mental illness or battered spouse syndrome.

But that lack of understanding isn't justifiable. Nor is ignoring the details.

I don't find the outrage surprising, just wrong. (I am always disgusted in the way the public loves to revel in the gory details of crimes such as these -- all the while claiming to be outraged by those details and ignoring the non-tittilating facts.)

The basis for your objection to Ms. Homolka's sentences appears contrary to the facts. It seems clear that prosecutors and police knew about the tapes many months before Ms. Homolka's plea bargain became final. And, of course, the court did not have to simply accept the deal if it had been wrong.

Finally, saying that Ms. Homolka could have simply walked away is to simply disregard the reality of mental illness, battered spouse sydrome, and being a compliant victim.

It is particularly sad that people throw around psychological terms like "psychopath" while ignoring actual psychological conditions and evidence that are relevant.

Oh. Well, you think I'd care about rapists of 14, 15 year olds in general, right? Only, I don't.
You might disagree if you yourself were raped.

Try to show a bit of sympathy, I have dealt with rape victims of this age group before. These are life changing attacks.

If you saw the videotape of one of the victims screaming for death as Karla and Paul sawed her legs off you might feel a bit of vigilantism creeping up on you too.

You might disagree if you yourself were raped.

Try to show a bit of sympathy, I have dealt with rape victims of this age group before. These are life changing attacks.
I have been sexually harrassed before. Twice. Perhaps I am depressed or something. Perhaps life has SUCKED all the sympathy and humanity out of me. I just don't seem to care.

Sexual harrassment is different than rape.

I'm talking about "drag you into the bushes, cut off your clothes and try to murder you" style rapes. PTSD is always a result (the same thing that soldiers experience after a particularly brutal tour of duty), and agrophobia can set in.

If you saw the videotape of one of the victims screaming for death as Karla and Paul sawed her legs off you might feel a bit of vigilantism creeping up on you too.

Oh, and you have seen the videotape, have you?

I don't think so. No-one, apart from the courts, have seen any of that stuff.

You state alot of mixed things about the case. Which I understand -- it may cause you mixed emotions.

I understand that cases like this cause a great deal of hysteria and paranoia.

And, as you say and demonstrate, people do not understand mental illness or battered spouse syndrome.

But that lack of understanding isn't justifiable. Nor is ignoring the details.

I don't find the outrage surprising, just wrong. (I am always disgusted in the way the public loves to revel in the gory details of crimes such as these -- all the while claiming to be outraged by those details and ignoring the non-tittilating facts.)

The basis for your objection to Ms. Homolka's sentences appears contrary to the facts. It seems clear that prosecutors and police knew about the tapes many months before Ms. Homolka's plea bargain became final. And, of course, the court did not have to simply accept the deal if it had been wrong.

Finally, saying that Ms. Homolka could have simply walked away is to simply disregard the reality of mental illness, battered spouse sydrome, and being a compliant victim.

It is particularly sad that people throw around psychological terms like "psychopath" while ignoring actual psychological conditions and evidence that are relevant.

Ok, I need to clarify this: I object to the sentence because it was a monumental bungling on the part of the prosecution in NOT acting on the existence of those tapes. Just my personal opinion of the mess.

I am conflicted about the entire Karla Homolka side of the case, your right. My emotions want to see her suffer some more. My mind tells me her sentence cannot be retroactiveloy changed, she's done her time and probably does feel some remorse about her part in the killings. My soul tells me that killing people (outside of a life or death situation) is just wrong, even if they are proven to be an unrepentant mass murderer.

Oh, and you have seen the videotape, have you?

I don't think so. No-one, apart from the courts, have seen any of that stuff.

I went to school with a guy who was on the jury.

I went to school with a guy who was on the jury.
I lived within blocks as a child. :p

Anyway, I do think someone might kill her. Look at the Kennedy assassination; some wankjob felt strong enough about the fact that his beloved president was killed and went out of his way to kill the hitman on national television.

I don't put it past a Canadian feeling passionate about it.

It's too bad she wasn't sentenced to spending the rest of her natural life in prison... so it goes...

Who is Karla Homolka?

Who is Karla Homolka?
a serial rapist and murderer

she raped and murdered her own baby syster...with her boyfriend.

Oh, and you have seen the videotape, have you?

I don't think so. No-one, apart from the courts, have seen any of that stuff.

The tapes, shown on June 1 and lasting nearly 44 minutes, were played twice in their entirety to allow the jury to absorb both the images and the dialogue. They had a deadening effect on almost everyone in the room. Bernardo's lawyers, John Rosen and Tony Bryant, worked on newspaper crossword puzzles rather than watch. Initially, many spectators stared at the floor or shook their heads in disbelief. By the end of the afternoon, the public galleries were nearly empty. "I can't understand how people can be that way," spectator Cindy Dempster, a 22-year-old community college student, said outside. "It's sadistic, psychotic, gross."

The following morning, the Crown played a series of even more chilling tapes that depicted the June 15, 1991, confinement and rape of Leslie Mahaffy - whose dismembered body was later found encased in concrete in a nearby lake. While only the jury and court officials saw the images, Bernardo's voice was perfectly audible in the public gallery at several points. And among those listening was the victim's mother, Debbie Mahaffy, who made a startling entrance, accompanied by two victims'-rights advocates, while the Crown was playing a 25½-minute tape. As music by pop performer David Bowie and reggae legend Bob Marley plays in the background, Bernardo and Homolka perform numerous sex acts with the teenager, whose speech sounds slurred and uncertain. At one point, Bernardo says: "You're doing a good job, Leslie, a damned good job." Then, he adds: "The next two hours are going to determine what I do to you. Right now, you're scoring perfect." As she listened, Mahaffy's mother sat absolutely rigid, her right fist clenched and pressed against her chest, and her face locked in utter agony. When she stood up to leave, she staggered and almost fell.

Later, on another segment of tape, the assault escalates. Mahaffy cries out in pain and begs Bernardo to stop; in the Crown description of the scene, he is sodomizing her while her hands are bound with twine. Mahaffy says that her blindfold seems to be slipping. That was a terrifying prospect, Crown attorney Ray Houlahan said in his opening statement, because Mahaffy felt that if Bernardo believed she could identify him, he would kill her.

As Houlahan portrays it, Mahaffy was not the only one frightened of Bernardo. He is trying to show the jury that Homolka participated unwillingly in her ex-husband's crimes because she was petrified of his physical and mental abuse. Prior to the showing of the tapes, he called Homolka's mother, Dorothy, and her sister, Lori, both of whom testified about the relationship between Karla and Bernardo. They said that they had observed an escalating pattern of abuse, culminating in a terrible beating in early January, 1993, that ended the relationship.

But the family's testimony left several holes in the story. In effective cross-examinations by Rosen, mother and daughter conceded that Bernardo's abuse of Karla occurred only in the last six months of the relationship, after the murders of Mahaffy and French. Until then, they acknowledged, Homolka and Bernardo appeared to be a happy, loving couple. They also agreed with Rosen that, shortly after the French murder, something happened between Homolka and Bernardo that destroyed their marriage. But they said they had no idea what it was.

I understand -- it may cause you mixed emotions.
I do not have mixed emotion about the rapist murderer you are defending

...When Tammy was rendered unconscious, Bernardo said, "Here we go! Keep 'er down!"
...
The only explanation she was ever able to offer was that she thought the assault would be "a one-time thing" and felt pressured.

The only caveat she ever attempted to impose upon Bernardo -- vainly, it turned out -- was that he wear a condom while he was
raping and sodomizing Tammy.

A mere two weeks after Tammy's death, the soil on her grave still fresh, Bernardo and Homolka used the dead girl's underwear
and stuffed animals as props in grotesque sex play in her bedroom.

Because of the flickering flames of a fire in the background, and the lengthy dialogue between the couple, this tape became known
as the "Fireside Chat" tape at Bernardo's trial in the summer of 1995, where it was played in public.

Yesterday, Mr. Cooper read into the record virtually every word of the police transcript -- for every 15 seconds of tape, there is a
descriptive paragraph or two -- of that video.

Homolka is captured saying repeatedly, "I loved it when you f--- Tammy" or, the couple's code for rape, "when you took her
virginity." Homolka uses the couple's pet name for Bernardo's penis, "Snuffles."

At one point, he asks how she felt when he raped Tammy, and Homolka replies, "I felt proud. I felt happy." Another time, she
says, "I never want to forget the day you took her virginity, popped her hymen."

During this segment, in a preview of precisely what they later did in abducting Ms. Mahaffy and Ms. French, the couple discusses
their plans for the future -- bringing virgins as young as 13 home for Bernardo's pleasure. "We can do it 50 more times," Homolka
says. "We can do it every weekend, whenever we can."

"Will you help me get virgins?" he asks.

"I can go in the car with you," she replies, "if you think that's best, or stay here and clean up."

Bernardo alone abducted Ms. Mahaffy from her Burlington backyard, and after her murder, Homolka did clean their bungalow of
evidence; Ms. French was forced into the couple's car from a church parking lot, with Homolka holding onto her hair from the
back seat to keep her still.

At some stage in the play-acting, the scene shifts to Tammy's bedroom, Homolka appears wearing her dead sister's clothes -- a
little black-and-white skirt and long-sleeved dark top -- and pretends to be Tammy.

She has with her a brown paper bag with three pairs of Tammy's underpants.

At times, both of them rub these panties on their faces, Bernardo while staring at Tammy's graduation picture. The pair also
incorporates into the play one of Tammy's toys, a green stuffed snake, and a red rose, which Homolka drags lovingly across his
buttocks, saying, "We're going to Tammy tomorrow; we're going to put it on her grave."

Homolka is shown, Mr. Cooper read out yesterday, mugging for the camera. She also thanks Bernardo, whom she frequently
addresses by his favourite nickname -- "The King" -- for making her sexually assault Tammy.

Bernardo notes happily at one point that "Your nipples are hard."

Mr. Cooper also read parts of the transcripts from the couple's completed assault upon Jane Doe.

This videotape was never played in open court at Bernardo's trial, so yesterday was the first time that such details of what
happened to the girl have been made public.

Jane, whom Homolka had met through her work at the pet clinic, was drugged -- despite the earlier close call that saw her briefly
stop breathing -- and rendered unconscious. Homolka is again shown holding a Halothane-saturated cloth over her mouth and
nose.

As Bernardo sticks fingers into the drugged teen, then rapes her, Homolka frequently "waves to the camera" or "blows a kiss to
the camera," Mr. Cooper read. At one point, "she looks at the camera, smiles, opens her mouth wide, and wiggles her tongue wide
in a licking motion, then blows a kiss to the camera."

She is also shown, the lawyer read, "straddling Jane's face."

Jane Doe didn't know for years that she had been violated, Bernardo's original trial heard.

I can't remember, now, if it was after the aborted assault, or the successful one, that Jane woke up at the Bernardo-Homolka
home the next morning. What I am certain of is that this child was ashamed. She thought she had simply had too much to drink,
and passed out. She apologized, profusely, to her host and hostess.

The host is in jail for life.

The hostess is slated to get out of jail in July next year, at the standard two-thirds mark of her 12-year sentence. She will have
served not one minute for what she did to Jane. She will never have, on her criminal record, the ignominy of what she did to her sister.

This poll is sick and twisted :(

Dead in 1-3 years by a headhunter in jail.