While the RCMP are investigating her death as a homicide,
Patterson's friends and family are now turning their focus to her young children D, 4, and C, 1.
Stacey Thomas, another friend, said Patterson's children meant the world to her and they are surrounded by their family at this difficult time.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunsw...son-children-donations-146.html#ixzz1CjNizhTY
Defence lawyer Scott Fowler asked that the matter be adjourned and Judge Anne Dugas-Horsman
scheduled Prosser's next appearance for Feb. 28.
Crown prosecutor Annie St. Jacques told the judge
she spoke with the victim's family and they are not looking for a publication ban, which is often put in place when sexual charges are laid.
Fowler waived his client's right to bail, though Prosser is already remanded on other charges. He had a bail hearing on Dec. 15 and was denied release.
http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/front/article/1375942
It makes me sad that such a specific detail about the sexual assault was released. (from the quote above, I don't even want to repeat it) The children don't need to know that.
I don't know, maybe it's just me.
BTW, I am in no way criticizing you, Hazel.
It's not just you, I understand.
However, that was one of the actual charges. Some news outlets reported "3 counts of sexual assault" without specifying. Others reported it just as the charges were written.
Obviously, you never want children to hear those things about their mother. You never want them to hear she was strangled, or beaten or shot either. We don't even know how she was killed yet. That could be far worse. We had a case here where there was also more than one type of rape and the woman bled to death. :sick:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50960321-76/vara-medina-murder-case.html.csp
So, it is entirely possible that these were the GOOD details and that is why they were released. I wish it never had to be printed at all... because I wish Sabrina wasn't dead. Since it has to be, there are 3 reasons I am not bothered by this particular information being printed.
1. Her kids are 1 and 4 years old. They should not be reading news articles about their mother's murder for many years. They will likely HEAR someone talking about it before this news article will have any effect. I heard FAR more detail about my cousin's murder from family than I did from the news articles I read.
2. This would have come out in a trial long before they were old enough to read about it anyway. So either way, it would be out there while they were still very young.
3. The family is not asking for a publication ban. Which even happens in child *advertiser censored* cases. So to me, if the family is not concerned about this... they must have a reason for that. Perhaps they want every detail of what he did to be known, so they people understand what kind of monster he really is? I can see myself feeling that way. Either way, since it was their family member they had that choice to decide.
I wish that the killer would have simply confessed so that none of it had to be released at all. 
