• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Russell Williams charged in 2 x murders, confinement, sexual assault.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nope.  Colonel Williams is our Old Yeller - and we have to take him out back (metaphorically speaking) - that's a court martial to denounce him and his conduct.  Don't forget, he assuaulted and murdered a subordinate, based on information he obtained as a superior.  There is a clear military nexus to this case and a clear need for military denunciation of his conduct.

In this case, I suspect Director Military Prosecutions has been given marching orders by much higher.  Unfortunately, in this case, it will be damaging to the institution.

 
Is he really though?  I accept that he is in the military and to make matters worse in an important command role.  But the military didn't make him do the things he did nor did it turn him into the monster he is.  Why should the military take responsibility for his actions?  I think the CF is doing the right thing.  He`s being convicted in civilian court.  The CF is going to dismiss him and strip him of his decorations.  We don`t need a mea-culpa.

Drapeau seems to think that the public support for the military took a hit because of this.  I'm not sure that it has.  I think the public is appalled by what happened but I don't think they are saying were all a bunch of psychos because of the actions of one man.

What benefit would a court martial have?  What if he decides to fight the charges?  What if the Cf bungles the case?  Does the public (and the families) need to be put through more trials?  What if he uses a defence that somehow he has PTSD and the CF should have stopped him or worse he states that he tried to get help but was turned away etc etc.  I think a court martial would do more harm than good.

I will however concede your point about the Director Military Prosecutions and his marching orders.
 
I think the DLaw is correct. He clearly states:

...no court martial arising out of the same facts leading to the civilian charges... AND
...the National Defence Act specifically prevents an individual from being tried by court martial where the offense or any other substantially similar offense arising out of the same underlying facts have been previously dealt with by a civilian court.

Neither of which precludes a CM for purely Service offences (129, 130 for example). Just the same, I agree with Crantor that the families don't need to be exposed to more pain. We can deal with him through administrative means and achieve the same end.

I've given up paying much attention to what Drapeau has to say. Even if he's close to being in his lane this one time.
 
Crantor said:
But the military didn't make him do the things he did nor did it turn him into the monster he is.  Why should the military take responsibility for his actions? 
The CF would be taking public responsibility for our organization; how can that possibly be interpreted as "we made him this way"?

The civilian world sees "stripping him of his decorations" as "oooh, he's losing his boyscout badges" -- "dismissal with disgrace" however is an expression everyone can understand....and accept as justified without the usual CBC commentariat whining. I personally think it sends a weaker message to the public regarding our professional ethos by saying, "oh, we're dealing with him administratively."

As for the litany of "what if this" or "what if that" -- well, planners and leaders consider contingencies so that they can be mitigated.....at least in my part of the CF anyway. 



Drapeau seems to think...
Not often or well.
 
There's also the issue that the CF needs to let the current proceedings conclude. It's bad law, not to mention bad professional manners, to have the same defendant at concurrent trials, far too much to go wrong. Once his sentence is passed the CF has a clear shot at him and can act without fear of prejudicing his current trial. Even though he's plead guilty, in law he needs to be found guilty at trial, and sentence needs to be passed. Until that time, the CF should quietly consider any potential case, and have it ready should it be appropriate to proceed.
 
This should cover it:

Section 92 of the National Defence Act:

Every officer who behaves in a scandalous manner unbecoming an officer is guilty of an offence and on conviction shall suffer dismissal with disgrace from Her Majesty’s service or dismissal from Her Majesty’s service
 
Journeyman said:
The CF would be taking public responsibility for our organization; how can that possibly be interpreted as "we made him this way"?

The civilian world sees "stripping him of his decorations" as "oooh, he's losing his boyscout badges" -- "dismissal with disgrace" however is an expression everyone can understand....and accept as justified without the usual CBC commentariat whining. I personally think it sends a weaker message to the public regarding our professional ethos by saying, "oh, we're dealing with him administratively."

As for the litany of "what if this" or "what if that" -- well, planners and leaders consider contingencies so that they can be mitigated.....at least in my part of the CF anyway. 


Not often or well.

I think that the public would rather see swift action at removing his rank, dismissing him and stripping him of his decorations sooner rather than later.  I don`t think they really want to see a kangaroo court that is going to take longer than it should.  No one wants to hear about why it took the CF two years to try and convict him.  No one wants to see him get another dime of his Colonel's salary or have the right to wear his uniform (which he would at a court martial) ever again.  And the punishment he gets for a 129 or disgraceful conduct would be meaningless anyway.

Agreed about Col Drapeau. 
 
Not only must justice be done, it must be seen as being done.

The criminal trial takes care of the CCC offences.

I firmly beleive, as a long serving military member, that he should be tried under Section 92 of the NDA.
 
Jim Seggie said:
Not only must justice be done, it must be seen as being done.

The criminal trial takes care of the CCC offences.

I firmly beleive, as a long serving military member, that he should be tried under Section 92 of the NDA.

You are correct Jim.  Else we all shall possibly be tarred with the same brush in the court of public opinion.  And as this loser is sadly one of us we also should have our pound of flesh.
 
jollyjacktar said:
You are correct Jim.  Else we all shall possibly be tarred with the same brush in the court of public opinion.  And as this loser is sadly one of us we also should have our pound of flesh.
And there are a few senior officers who could be tried under this. Tangent ends.
 
dapaterson said:
Lieutenant Colonel MacGregor is clearly in need of a refresher on military law.  There are ample areas under the NDA that could be used to court-martial Colonel Williams without risking double jeopardy, providing a needed military denunciation of him and his conduct.

For example, fighting with another member of the Canadian Forces (NDA 86) is an offence which carries a punishment of two years imprisonment or less punishment; striking or ill-treating a subordinate (NDA 95) carries the same punishment; and scandalous conduct by an officer (NDA 92) carries a sentence of dismissal with disgrace or dismissal.  And of course, the catch-all of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline (NDA 129)  could be employed as well.

A court-martial for Colonel Williams with those charges would not represent double jeopardy as all are uniquely military offences for which he has not been charged under the Criminal Code.  They would provide an opportunity for the Canadian Forces to clearly denounce his behaviour, and reflect the military community’s revulsion at Colonel Williams’ gross failings as a military leader.
I think the way to show we are serious about keeping our house clean is to permanently empower the civilian courts to level a heavier sentance against service personnel who so grossly fail in thier conduct.  As stated in another thread:

MCG said:
Personally, I would like to see an amendment to the NDA that empowers civilian criminal courts to add dismissal with disgrace from Her Majesty’s Service for any criminal offence punishable by more than one year imprisonment.  This punishment would be applicable to any CF member, including Class A reservists that would not normally be subject to the NDA at the time of the offence.

We expect soldiers to uphold the values of the Canadian public, so we may as well empower the criminal courts to eject those who so egregiously fail to do so.
 
On "doulbe jeapordy" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Wigglesworth
 
The old way of punishing criminals (even criminals like Col. Williams, or Paul Bernardo, etc, etc, etc) is outdated.  Eye for an eye does not work.  If it did work or was an effective deterrant for capital offences then why do the Americans and other nations in the world still continue to find people to execute? The death penalty is not stopping people from killing eachother.  IMO a 6x9 cell without windows or exposure to other human beings is the proper way to dispose of convicted murders and those who endanger or do harm to our children.  By committing these crimes Col. Williams has forfeited his charter rights and should be subjected to the above punishment for 23 of 24 hours a day for the rest of his life.  Ending his or any other monsters life makes us no better than him. Civilization must hold itself to a higher moral standard.  My :2c:

Tangent ends


RTG :cdn:
 
I beg to differ.

While Williams is in prison, even in solitary, he will continue to manipulate and influence the others around him, including corrections officers. I've seen a number of then "turned" by smooth talkers.

Williams would learn....hell he'd do the same.

He can't influence anyone if he's dead.
 
readytogo said:
The old way of punishing criminals (even criminals like Col. Williams, or Paul Bernardo, etc, etc, etc) is outdated.  Eye for an eye does not work.  If it did work or was an effective deterrant for capital offences then why do the Americans and other nations in the world still continue to find people to execute? The death penalty is not stopping people from killing eachother.  IMO a 6x9 cell without windows or exposure to other human beings is the proper way to dispose of convicted murders and those who endanger or do harm to our children.  By committing these crimes Col. Williams has forfeited his charter rights and should be subjected to the above punishment for 23 of 24 hours a day for the rest of his life.  Ending his or any other monsters life makes us no better than him. Civilization must hold itself to a higher moral standard.  My :2c:

Tangent ends


RTG :cdn:

I think you may have your wires crossed RTG!  ;D

What you have suggested amounts to torture. Humans as a social animal require contact with other human beings. To take that away from them in the manner you have suggested can not be considered the moral high ground! It would be an absolutely miserable death- and really would amount to putting him to death anyways. Just slowly.

It isnt a matter of retribution or of revenge. Its a matter of the protection of the public. I know enough of prisons to know that just because it is said a man will never get out again does not mean that they will never get out again. The fact that I have a wife and a daughter means that I have no interest in keeping gentlemen like these around. They have rejected society and we can not allow them to be present in it anymore! Its amatter of utility. And as such when carried out as a duty cannot be viewed in the same regard as a man breaking in to someones house, choking them to death, and sexually assaulting them.

Banishment to walk the "wastes" would also be acceptable should a suitable place be located. Ala Judge Dredd

As an example of why the suggestion that they be allowed to stay alive and think about their crimes is a non-starter. I believe Clifford Olsen summed it up nicely when asked to disclose the locations of the other victims for the sake of the families.

"If I gave a shit about them I wouldn't have murdered their kids".

We can't look at it like we would for a reasonable person.
 
Fair enough,

            Perhaps I went a little to far to the extreme with permenant solitary confinement, I also have a wife and 2 children (1 daughter) and I cant imagine what I would think if someone like Col. Williams were to be "introduced" into our lives.  I just dont see how killing another human being solves the issue, maybe there isnt a solution?? That being said if my wife or children came into contact with someone like Col. Williams perhaps my tune would change drastically? My point was that we as a society have had monsters walk among us, some we have caught, some we have executed, some still walk among us(im sure anyway) I agree protection is the key but it seems we kill a crazy and another one is standin in line to take his place????
 
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20101020/williams_confession_101020/

CTV.ca News Staff
20 October 2010 4:33 PM ET


Disgraced Col. Russell Williams wrote a letter to the mother of one of his murder victims, saying that her daughter loved her very much because she "told me so again and again," a court heard on Wednesday.

The letter was presented in a Belleville, Ont. courtroom, during Williams's sentencing hearing for a string of fetish break-ins, two sexual assaults and two murders.

In the letter to the mother of Jessica Lloyd, who he confessed to sexually assaulting and killing last January, Williams said Lloyd had no idea he was going to kill her because "she believed she was going home."

In another letter, the former commander of CFB Trenton apologized to his wife for "having hurt you like this," and asked her to take care of their cat, Rosie. He signed off the letter with, "I love you, Russ."

On Tuesday, Williams was formally convicted of first-degree murder in the deaths of Lloyd and Cpl. Marie-France Comeau, the sexual assault of two other victims and 82 fetish break-ins during which he stole thousands of articles of women's and girls' underwear.

On Wednesday afternoon, friends and family members of the victims, as well as women who had personal items stolen during the break-ins, spoke in court about how they have been hurt by Williams's crimes.

Justice Robert Scott, who is presiding over the proceedings, instructed the media to only use the first names of those giving victim-impact statements.

A friend named Lisa said Lloyd had looked forward to being a wife and mother, and said her friend's death has "completely diminished" her faith in God.

"How could he create such a monster? The very person whose job it was to protect my country was terrorizing my community," Lisa said while holding a photograph of Lloyd.

Earlier Wednesday, the court viewed an edited version of the video of Williams's cold and methodical confession to police.

Several hours into the interview, which took place after police picked him up in connection to the murders of Lloyd and Comeau, Williams seemed to realize he was caught.

"I guess it's wide open now. What do you want to know?" he asks investigators.

In a matter-of-fact manner, Williams then detailed the gruesome murder of Lloyd, a 27-year-old woman who worked at a bus company in Napanee.

He described breaking into her home and attacking her in her bed.

"I raped her," Williams said in the video.

"A rape can mean a lot of things. What took place?" the investigator countered.

Williams then went on to describe in painstaking detail the various ways he assaulted Lloyd, how he threatened her and placed zip ties around her neck to control her. He also described to police how he made Lloyd model underwear, and photographed her as she did so.

Williams said he then took her to Tweed, where he lived. The day-and-a-half-long nightmare continued with numerous rapes, photo sessions and eventually with Lloyd suffering seizures, begging for her life.

Williams, after telling Lloyd he was taking her to the hospital, finally seemed to tire of the cruel game.

"And as we were walking ... I hit her on the back of the head," he told investigators in the video, in which he often referred to her by her first name as though they were friends.

"I was surprised that her skull gave way. She was immediately unconscious and I strangled her."

After that Williams explained that he hid Lloyd's body in his garage and went to work because he was flying a military plane to California early the next day. He later returned to get rid of her body and clean up the mess.

Cpl. Marie-France Comeau

In the video shown to the courtroom, Williams also described the murder of Comeau, pronouncing her name with the correct French accent.

He admitted breaking into Comeau's home and hiding in her basement, waiting for her to fall asleep, and how she came down to the basement in search of her cat.

"So when she spotted me I had the same flashlight (and) subdued her, brought her upstairs and, uh, strangled her, well more suffocated her with some tape," he said.

Later in the video he admitted raping and photographing Comeau.

Williams, who was commander of the CFB Trenton airbase at the time of the murders, explained in the video that he used duct tape to cover Comeau's mouth and nose, until she suffocated.

"I had thought about strangling her earlier...it was a short-lived attempt because she struggled quite a bit. So I decided I had to suffocate her," he said.

The reason he murdered her, he said, was that there was an obvious link to an assault he had committed on a woman who lived near him in Tweed.

When asked by investigators whether he would have continued to commit murders and sexual assaults if he hadn't been caught, Williams was ambiguous.

"I was hoping not. I can't answer that question," he said.

Concern for wife, Canadian Forces

Earlier in the video, after being told his two houses were being searched, Williams told his interrogators his main concern was the effect it would have on his wife and the Canadian Forces.

"I'm struggling with how upset my wife is right now," Williams said. "I'm concerned that they are tearing apart my wife's brand new home."

It was a road-side check that brought Williams to the attention of investigators after they matched his tire tread to one found near Lloyd's home. They quickly connected him also to Comeau's murder.

In the video he asks if he can assume that officers will be discreet, and says he is concerned about "the impact this is going to have on the Canadian Forces."

Statement of facts

Over the first two days of his sentencing hearing, the prosecution meticulously went through all of the charges against Williams, reading the agreed statement of facts and showing photos -- some taken by Williams himself and others taken by forensic investigators.

Late Tuesday afternoon, the judge had enough evidence to register a formal conviction against Williams on first-degree murder, sexual assault and break and enter and theft charges. He has pleaded guilty to all the charges against him.

Once the victim impact statements were completed, court adjourned for the day. The judge is expected to deliver his sentence on Thursday.
 
readytogo said:
The old way of punishing criminals (even criminals like Col. Williams, or Paul Bernardo, etc, etc, etc) is outdated.  Eye for an eye does not work.  If it did work or was an effective deterrant for capital offences then why do the Americans and other nations in the world still continue to find people to execute? The death penalty is not stopping people from killing eachother.  IMO a 6x9 cell without windows or exposure to other human beings is the proper way to dispose of convicted murders and those who endanger or do harm to our children.  By committing these crimes Col. Williams has forfeited his charter rights and should be subjected to the above punishment for 23 of 24 hours a day for the rest of his life.  Ending his or any other monsters life makes us no better than him. Civilization must hold itself to a higher moral standard.  My :2c:

Tangent ends RTG :cdn:

Ends  ???

He thoroughly deserves the firing squad.
Somewhere in military law is found, or should be found, the ultimate punishment for such heinous act commited by such high ranking officers. And that military law.......if it so still exists anywhere in the heirarchy of Her Majesty should overwhelmingly prevail over any and all other courts.
So YES......The Canadian Military should have a hell of alot more to say in this matter. And it should go much farther. And by that I mean to the very top. A Royal Matter, because allegiance is made to the Queen

Every soldier below his gained rank would have looked up to him as being an unquestionable good example of a senior
military officer normally found within our armed forces, and would have undoubtedly saluted him !
And that salute was to his commission or to the Queen.
And commissionned officers are required to be and behave in an exemplary fashion at all times.
That does not mean that NCOs should be found less 'exemplary' (however ;D)
But Willy, as I will call him, is the definition of disgrace to the uniform.
And many a soldier has stood the squad for much much less.

We as soldiers and veterans like myself will not stand for this kind of crap finding their way to the high echelons
of our armed forces.
It is expected that punishment for his crimes are dealt with by the highest authority due to the fact that he is
of such a distinguished rank.
And that authority should place him standing blindfolded.

And those who find weakness in their knees should gird themselves.
Military Justice should prevail.
My :2c:
57C
 
readytogo said:
Fair enough,

            Perhaps I went a little to far to the extreme with permenant solitary confinement, I also have a wife and 2 children (1 daughter) and I cant imagine what I would think if someone like Col. Williams were to be "introduced" into our lives.  I just dont see how killing another human being solves the issue, maybe there isnt a solution?? That being said if my wife or children came into contact with someone like Col. Williams perhaps my tune would change drastically? My point was that we as a society have had monsters walk among us, some we have caught, some we have executed, some still walk among us(im sure anyway) I agree protection is the key but it seems we kill a crazy and another one is standin in line to take his place????
This is a good counter argument to capital punishment.  It wouldn't be a deterrent to guys like Williams, Bernardo, et al; it would be pure punishment to avoid the drain on society that he will become (imprisonment, feeding, medical treatment, etc) for xxx years.  It's a tough choice to reinstate capital punishment, and it would take a lot of debate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top