Victim's Mother Wants Accused Returned From Canada (Canada no friend of ours)

AP via KATV ^ | 1/16/2007 | ?

[TheBattman]

Victim's Mother Wants Accused Returned From Canada

Tuesday January 16, 2007 5:35pm

Benton (AP) - The mother of a slain Saline County man says she would be letting her dead son down if she agreed to any prosecution plan that would prevent Arkansas from seeking an accused man's execution.

Timothy Wallace is being held in a Calgary, Alberta, jail pending a return to the U-S. Canada wants an assurance from the United States that Wallace would not be put to death if he is convicted in the 2005 deaths of Billy Hassell and Wallace's former wife Brandy.

Sissy Brady, Hassell's mother, said Canada should return Wallace to face whatever punishment is appropriate.

Wallace's lawyer says Canada's government will not release an inmate to a country that may execute him. Attorney Gregory Dunn says Canadian authorities could release Wallace because he faces no crime in that country.

[TheBattman]

I guess this is why our courts try to use "international law" and the laws of other countries? I guess this is just another case of Canada being no friend of the US - they want to dictate what justice is to us - and control how we punish criminals (murderers).

So basically, if the death penalty is on the table, then they will not extradite this murderer...

[TeenagedConservative]

An absolutely starkly clear example of infringement on our national sovereignty.

[Brucifer]

If Canada wants to have American murderers moving up there to escape punishment, then fine. Sooner or later they'll have to start locking them up themselves, on their dollar. I think it's a bigger problem for Canada than the US.

[ElkGroveDan]

Attorney Gregory Dunn says Canadian authorities could release Wallace because he faces no crime in that country.

I think there's something missing from that sentence. We all face crime every day, as do Canadians.

[CindyDawg]

Keep him then. We can watch him and wait. Our justice system is patient.

[Gay State Conservative]

Canadians see themselves as morally superior (*far* superior) to their neighbors to the south.But then,Mexico believes the same about their northern neighbors.As a result,they won't extradite anyone for the DP thus making their country the destination of choice for all fleeing murderers.

I say we leave them there if they manage to cross the border.Doing so would,I think,cause the Canadians and the Mexicans to ask themselves "do we really want to be seen as nirvana by every two bit American murderer?".

Then they'll change their attitude.

[I see my hands]

"Canadians see themselves as morally superior.."

How Canadiotic of them.

[Jaysun]

We need to assure Canada that we will not administer the death penalty and have them send us all of our criminals. Then we can lock them in a closet with a Luger and whatever happens, happens.

[beelzepug]

If our sovereignty means nothing to them, then why should theirs matter to us. Send a couple of undercovers up there to get him and bring him out. They'll figure out we have him back when they read about the trial.

[conservative in nyc]

An absolutely starkly clear example of infringement on our national sovereignty.

Huh? The criminal isn't in the United States - he's in Canada. Canada is another country. U.S. laws generally don't apply there any more than Canadian laws do here.

OUR national sovereignty isn't being infringed by Canada. If our extradition treaty with them says they don't need to extradite people who are subject to the death penalty, then they don't have to do it.

I don't know why Canada would WANT to coddle our dangerous criminals though. As a practical matter, they should want them to leave the country and not have to pay to keep them in jail.

[prov1813man]

If it were me, I'd tell them to let him go.

[PAR35]

An absolutely starkly clear example of infringement on our national sovereignty.

A starkly clear example of the state of the educational system in your community.

[sgtbono2002]

Let me get this straight. canada has 3 choices.
1. Keeping this killer in jail without trial.
2. Turning a suspected Killer loose.
3. Sending him to the US for trial and possible execution.

If they keep the guy in jail they are paying his expenses and holding him without trial. If they turn him loose he may one day wander back and we get him or they have a killer amongst canadian citizens..

It looks to me like lose --lose for Canada. If they were smart they would give him up.

[digitalbrownshirt]

Anybody rememember Charles Ng back in the 80's? He was a serial rapist/murderer in California. He escaped to Calgary where he was arrested for shoplifting. The Canadians didn't want to send him back because of the DP. He was sentenced to 4 1/2 years in prison for the shoplifting. Reagan told them they could turn him loose on their streets if they didn't want to send him back. His butt was on a plane the same day.

[fanfan]

OUR national sovereignty isn't being infringed by Canada.

LOL!
We're too small to infringe on your National Sovereignty!

If our extradition treaty with them says they don't need to extradite people who are subject to the death penalty, then they don't have to do it.

I don't know why Canada would WANT to coddle our dangerous criminals though. As a practical matter, they should want them to leave the country and not have to pay to keep them in jail.

Trudeau, I'm sure, was responsible for that particular beauty..."We can't send anyone back who might be killed!". *spit* Charles Ing, anyone?

OTOH, in Toronto right now, there is a big debate on the fate of a 67 yr. old woman (illegal alien) from St. Lucia, who needs lifesaving heart surgery.

So far, not too much is known about her, and the operations costs $50,000.

I can't believe it is even a question. There are many 'Canadians' on waiting lists for cardiac procedures, and we are supposed to let this woman get in to the middle, if not top of the list because shes here?

To heck with illegal aliens, and criminals!

[conservative in nyc]

Googling the Ng case, it appears the Supreme Court of Canada has reversed course and now says that extraditing persons potentially subject to the death penalty violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and can't be done except in exceptional circumstances. So even though Article VI of the Extradition Treaty says Canada COULD extradite someone who may be subject to the death penalty if the government wants, the Supreme Court says it usually can't.

I assume we should be blaming Cretin's appointees for that 2001 decision? An anonymous decision, of course.

[Grizzled Bear]

Canadians see themselves as morally superior (*far* superior) to their neighbors to the south.
___________________________________________________________

But don't they have that great "Socialmalized Medicine" up there? I hear it's really great. At least that's what the Canadians who come here for MRIs have been telling me.

[GMMAC]

"Attorney Gregory Dunn says Canadian authorities could release Wallace because he faces no crime in that country."

Dunn must have obtained his law degree - if he has one - via a matchbook cover since the current bilateral & well functioning extradition treaty between our countries has been in place since 1971.

Although I happen to personally favor capital punishment, the only fly in the ointment in this particular matter is Canada's having abolished it here three decades ago and, along with virtually all countries worldwide which have done so, we generally don't permit extradition of fugitives to face same.

All the State which wants Timothy Wallace back needs to do is waive this one particular penalty - which either similarly doesn't exist or is very infrequently applied in the majority of U.S. States anyway - and there's no problem.

Most of the posters on this thread should rightly grow up & try to get it through their heads that moronic & hysterical vilification of their nation's allies is plainly no substitute for legitimate patriotism.

[DieHard the Hunter]

> An absolutely starkly clear example of infringement on our national sovereignty.

No, it's a practical demonstration of Canada's sovereignty. They have captured the scroat for you: and in exchange for this effort expended they require the US to guarantee that he doesn't face the death penalty should he be extradited.

And no, I do not support Canada's stance in this matter: I support the death penalty. But please let's be clear on this: Canada is under no compulsion or obligation to extradite. They have done the hard yards capturing the scroat, and now they demand a price.

They're something like Cyber-Squatters in this respect.

It's a "like-it-or-lump-it" proposition: if you want the scroat turned over by Canada, you will need to guarantee he won't get death. Otherwise, you are free to catch him on your own if/when they release him.

(Hint: catch him on your own. That is what bounty hunters and US Marshals are for, and they are good at what they do. Send in The Dog.)

[TheBattman]

If they were smart they would give him up.

And I think you just answered all questions....