GUILTY Canada - Paul Bernardo & Karla Homolka, murdered, 1993

[bluesneakers]

Everything I've seen or read so far has only mentioned the death of her sister. Does it bother anyone else they omit drugging, rape and assault that occurred before that? Same person, but two incidents. Killing isn't the only thing she did.

Ugh. She makes me sick.

 

[LadyL]

someone told me today that those restrictions were lifted ... idk if true

She is a True Psychopath. She's never had any shame or contrition about what she did. If I recall correctly, she participated and did the actual killing of the girls.

Of course the parents didn't raise objections before. They weren't given any information! I was under the impression part of her plea deal was that she couldn't be around children. Or in Canada are those more like guidelines?

This is insanity.

 

[LadyL]

her husband probably and her if she has been working as an ESL teacher

That's what I've been wondering. Who is paying for her children's tuition and fees? I can't imagine anyone hiring Karla Homolka, but you never know. There are some people who just don't seem to care about having an unrepentant murderer as an employee.

 

[dyannaON]

Another article on Karla by someone who interviewed her. I haven't listened to yet.

http://www.kisssudbury.com/2017/06/02/karla-homolka-exclusive/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[redheadedgal]

someone told me today that those restrictions were lifted ... idk if true

she had 12 conditions upon her release... to be in place for a year. a montreal judge lifted them all in novermber 2005. she's had no restrictions or conditions since then.
and fwiw, she hasn't reoffended in any way since her release.

 

[redheadedgal]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...ow-strict-rules-after-release/article1119647/

 

[Kamille]

she had 12 conditions upon her release... to be in place for a year. a montreal judge lifted them all in novermber 2005. she's had no restrictions or conditions since then.
and fwiw, she hasn't reoffended in any way since her release.

Wasn't she added to the National Sex Offender Registry? And if not, why not? :waitasec:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/to-ot/cpcmec-ccpede/bs-sc/nsor-rnds/index-eng.htm

 

[Kamille]

I wonder why KH and her husband left the relative obscurity of their tropical island home to return to Canada? They had to know it was going to be turmoil for their children. I wonder if the government of Canada has ever had any contact with the government of France to find out if there were ever any issues with KH while she was living there?

 

[redheadedgal]

Wasn't she added to the National Sex Offender Registry? And if not, why not? :waitasec:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/to-ot/cpcmec-ccpede/bs-sc/nsor-rnds/index-eng.htm

she wasn't charged with any sex crimes... only manslaughter. therefore, she's not a sex offender.

 

[redheadedgal]

I wonder if the government of Canada has ever had any contact with the government of France to find out if there were ever any issues with KH while she was living there?

if she'd gotten into trouble, we'd have heard. that's a given.
edit to add: oh you mean to specifically check up on her? i doubt it. she was 1) under no conditions 2) in another country

 

[matou]

OK she wasn't charged with any sex crimes but she participated in such and there is evidence of it. She should be a sex offender for life. The fact that she isn't is a technicality.

 

[Kamille]

she wasn't charged with any sex crimes... only manslaughter. therefore, she's not a sex offender.

BBM

Well yes she is. The fact that she was not charged for a sex crime and therefore was not required to be registered doesn't mean that she's not a sex offender. The evidence certainly proves it. I have to say I didn't follow that case at the time but I'm always more and more appalled at the complete incompetence of the prosecution with regards to KH.

Didn't she have to provide full disclosure to get that deal? They couldn't have at least insisted that she also be charged with the sex crimes and put on the registry? The sentences would have been concurrent anyway.

Anyway...I know there is nothing that can be done about it now. It's just so infuriating that this woman thinks she deserves the right to live a normal "soccer mom" life.

MOO

 

[matou]

I know. Some of the victims didn't even know they were being assaulted by her since they were drugged by HER and unconscious. i.e. Jane Doe.

 

[Kamille]

if she'd gotten into trouble, we'd have heard. that's a given.
edit to add: oh you mean to specifically check up on her? i doubt it. she was 1) under no conditions 2) in another country

Why would we have heard about any issues or suspicious behaviour that KH may have exhibited on a Caribbean island that may have gotten the attention of local LE? Unless of course she was actually charged with anything. Even then, why would we know about it? I think there was only one reporter who ever even went there to "out" her location and not much was said about it in the media after that. It certainly didn't prompt a whole flock of Canadian media reporters to go down there and make a fuss about it. She returned to Canada completely unknown to the media. She was likely here for 1-2 years before they found out. And that was by fluke because of the Luka Magnotta trial.

Did the local media in Guadeloupe ever run a story about her past when she was outed and they realized who they had living among them? Did they even know? Was she facing any pressure from friends, neighbours or acquaintances down there once they found out, or did they? What may have happened there that she chose to run away from? Returning to Canada, knowing the scrutiny he was placing his family under, couldn't have been an easy decision for her husband.

Just wondering if any of our intelligence services ever gave Guadeloupe, via the French government, a heads up about her once they found out where she had moved to. Or whether she lived there the entire time without them ever knowing the past history of one of their residents? And also whether anyone asked any questions about her time there once she returned to Canada. I know she's a free woman and has no restrictions on her but that doesn't mean she might not be on some kind of watch list based on her past history.

MOO

 

[dotr]

https://www.niagarathisweek.com/news-story/7348467-kristen-french-s-childhood-friend-s-message-to-karla-homolka-you-will-never-win/

 

[LaneGirl]

she had 12 conditions upon her release... to be in place for a year. a montreal judge lifted them all in novermber 2005. she's had no restrictions or conditions since then.
and fwiw, she hasn't reoffended in any way since her release.

Conditions based upon a plea for her life correct? Meaning she could fully be responsible but because she was willing to testify against another she got off lightly? Doesn't absolve her does it? And just because she hasn't reoffended in any way doesn't absolve her of her past does it? idk

 

[redheadedgal]

OK she wasn't charged with any sex crimes but she participated in such and there is evidence of it. She should be a sex offender for life. The fact that she isn't is a technicality.

i meant in the eyes of the law, obviously.

 

[redheadedgal]

Well yes she is.

answered in previous post ^^

 

[redheadedgal]

Conditions based upon a plea for her life correct? Meaning she could fully be responsible but because she was willing to testify against another she got off lightly? Doesn't absolve her does it? And just because she hasn't reoffended in any way doesn't absolve her of her past does it? idk

are you asking me a question? did i say anything about her being absolved? i'm confused lol

 

[LaneGirl]

are you asking me a question? did i say anything about her being absolved? i'm confused lol

Yep I was responding to your comment above that said...


"she had 12 conditions upon her release... to be in place for a year. a montreal judge lifted them all in novermber 2005. she's had no restrictions or conditions since then.
and fwiw, she hasn't reoffended in any way since her release".