From National post
One of the cornerstones of due process in law is that a person cannot be denied liberty once a sentence has been completed, even if in hindsight that sentence is considered inadequate. No matter what we might think of it, Homolka has fulfilled her end of the bargain. [/teaser]
I think section 810 should be challenged and thrown out. We have dangerous offender status and if they meet dangerous offender criteria, then they can keep them locked up indefinatly. The teaser above says it all.
The Government should not be able to add conditions to sentance after sentance is complete, like Karla's. It should be brought up at sentancing.
I too think she should be locked up for life. She recieved a very sweet deal from the crown unfortunatly, but she did her time (full time as well) and she lived up to her deal and so should the crown.
If they add conditions long after the fact, how many people are going to make deals with the crown, knowing there is a possibility their deal may be modified after they are done their time?
If they start doing that people may be less inclined to make a deal with crown so crown can get larger "fish" and thereby allowing dangerous criminals to remain free
and for people who plead guilty after making a plea with crown for a slightly reduced sentance, may be reluctant to make a deal and thereby it could really bog the courts down.