Author
|
Topic: Convicted Child Molestor Running for School Board
|
midge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3542
|
posted 19 October 2003 12:57 PM
Sexual Assault Convictions Dog Catholic School Board CandidateUnbelievable. Actually, no I take that back. It IS believable given the society we live in that he is allowed to run for the Catholic School Board and that he began teaching again in 1984 in B.C., Alberta and in Saskatchewan. This article doesn't mention that, but the one in the Regina Leader-Post says, "His teaching licence was suspended for 16 months and he became legally certified to teach again in 1984." Does anyone else find this disturbing/frustrating? Why are child molestors getting away with these things? He hasn't even admitted that he was at fault here. He DID plead guilty, but he said, he only pleaded guilty because he was persuaded to do so by senior clergy of the church.
From: home of medicare | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Timbaroo
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4343
|
posted 21 October 2003 05:05 PM
quote: Why are child molestors getting away with these things?
What is he getting away with? The article said that he spent 18 months in prison after convicted in 1981. The article also says he received a full pardon from the federal Solicitor General in 1994. I question the timing and motives of the other trustees in bringing this information to the attention of the media at this time.
From: Quebec | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
midge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3542
|
posted 21 October 2003 05:57 PM
What is he getting away with???I don't think his punishment was nearly enough. He was allowed to teach again. I don't think he should have been allowed to - would you trust him with your daughters? These girls will be affected for the REST of their lives, while this man is allowed to have his career back, and run for the school board. In the meantime, while given the chance at another position of authority, these girls might wonder why he is still able to get on with his life as though nothing happened after he did such a horrible thing to them. You can argue that he deserves a second chance. But those girls didn't get a second chance. We're supposed to be protecting our children from men like this, not the other way around and certainly not giving them the means (i.e. allowing him to teach again) to possibly molest another school girl.
From: home of medicare | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Timbaroo
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4343
|
posted 21 October 2003 11:26 PM
quote: I don't think his punishment was nearly enough. He was allowed to teach again. I don't think he should have been allowed to - would you trust him with your daughters?
Was his punishment enough? That's debatable. It seems appropriate to me. Since so much time has passed, I would probably trust him with my daughters. quote: These girls will be affected for the REST of their lives, while this man is allowed to have his career back, and run for the school board.
I'm not discrediting the trauma that these girls must have gone through. Terrible. quote: You can argue that he deserves a second chance. But those girls didn't get a second chance. We're supposed to be protecting our children from men like this, not the other way around and certainly not giving them the means (i.e. allowing him to teach again) to possibly molest another school girl.
I don't think he should have been allowed to return to teaching while he had that particular criminal record. He should however be allowed to return to his life after doing his time. He committed his crimes some 30 years ago. How long do we continue to persecute him for his indiscretions (crimes) in the 70's? What would satisfy you? That he be publicly lynched? Should he be allowed to work in a deli where there might be kids? Where does it stop?
From: Quebec | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370
|
posted 22 October 2003 01:18 AM
quote: He doesn't have his offenses of the 70's on his criminal record anymore since he has been granted a pardon, no matter what the reason for the pardon. This sounds like a smear campaign.
Yeah but it has been made public. quote: Hall, 57, was sentenced to 18 months in jail in July 1981, after pleading guilty in Regina Court of Queen's Bench to two charges of having sexual intercourse with females aged 14 to 16 and two charges of indecent assault of females.Hall was a schoolteacher at the time of the offences, which took place between 1974 and 1980 in Regina, Swift Current and Melfort.
This is the confusion. Everyone knows. He was convicted. Was he wrongfully convicted? Very vague.
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518
|
posted 22 October 2003 12:17 PM
The underlying question is whether this conviction really does suggest the man involved could not be a good trustee.Pardons are available to anyone who is completely rehabilitated. (I don't have time to check the precise wording of the Criminal Records Act, sorry.) When you apply for a pardon, a full investigation is done to determine whether or not there is any evidence of continued danger to the public, and also a weighing of what positive information concerning rehabilitation does exist. I think this is a hard case. I can understand parents being unwilling to trust the Mountie investigation concerning rehabilitation. Obviously, though, it is always "safest" to pretend that no one is ever rehabilitated, and if they presented a danger in 1980, then they must still present a danger. This mindset occurs most often with respect to parole, where the public iften thinks "why risk it?" In this case, though, we are talking, not about liberty, but the capacity to serve in a public office.
If I had to decide about this, I would ask myself whether a school trustee actually spends time alone with kids at all. If they don't, there can be no problem. Voting on a budget doesn't really present much of a risk. If the job of a trustee includes being closeted with kids sometimes, I might want to check into the recent doings of this individual before supporting him.
From: toronto | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
midge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3542
|
posted 22 October 2003 06:46 PM
Victim Irate Man Able To Run For School Board quote: The woman who says she was impregnated when she was 15 by Saskatoon Catholic school board candidate Denis Hall is angry that Hall denies his crime and that he is still involved with youth through sports."I went through hell to put him in jail to protect society and our community and he's still out there," the woman said in a telephone interview. "I'm very angry that he has denied it and he is still affecting young girls' lives," she said.
From: home of medicare | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|