« True Murder: The Most Shocking Killers

NOT CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE-TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE

2011-09-14 | 🔗
In February, 2009, Guy Turcotte a cardiologist stabbed his two young children, Anne-Sophie, 3, and Olivier, 5, 46 times while they were lying in their beds. Turcotte admitted to the killings, but in the subsequent murder trial he claimed he could not recall carrying them out. The Guy Turcotte murder trial was one of the most closely followed in recent history in Canada — both horrifying and captivating the public. The jury deliberated for 5 days, deciding on the fate of the cardiologist charged with first-degree murder in the deaths of his children Olivier and Anne-Sophie. The trial hinged on Turcotte’s state of mind at the time of the February 2009 slayings. Was he trying to get revenge on his estranged wife, a fellow doctor, for cheating on him with a mutual friend? Or was he a sick man who had lost all reason? Turcotte’s lawyers argued he had been rendered temporarily insane over the recent breakup of his marriage with Ms. Gaston. In the July verdict, a jury found he was “not criminally responsible” for his actions. In September, Turcotte faced a five-person mental health tribunal to determine whether he should be released, or whether he should be detained for another year. As the mental health tribunal decided whether to set Guy Turcotte free, hundreds of protesters gathered in 14 Quebec cities calling for an overhaul of the justice system. Crown prosecutors are seeking a retrial for Turcotte, arguing that the judge erred in law in his instructions to the jury. NOT CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE-TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE-Dan Zupansky
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
And now I thought from Geico Motorcycle. It took fifteen minutes to take a spirit, animal quiz online. Please be the cheetah these be the cheetah and learn your animal. Isn't the cheetah, but the far less appealing blood fish come on. To add insult to injury, you could have used those fifteen blobfish minutes to switch your motorcycle insurance to Geico Geico. Fifteen minutes could save you, fifteen percent or more on motorcycle insurance, and now I thought from Geico Motorcycle. It took fifteen minutes to take a spirit, animal quiz online. Please be the cheetah, please be the cheetah and learn your animal. Isn't the cheetah, but the far less appealing blood fish
come on. To add insult to injury, you could have used those fifteen blobfish minutes to switch your motorcycle insurance to Geico Geico. Fifteen minutes could save you, fifteen percent, or more on motorcycle insurance blah. Oh.
You are now listening to true murder, the most shocking killers in true crime, history and the authors that have written about him. Gacy Bundy, Dahmer, night, stalker, BT came every week. Another fascinating offer talking about the most shocking, an infamous killer crime history through murder, with your host journalist, Ann Arbor Dan asking good evening. This is your own. Dad is upheld, He for the programme to murder the motion. Can killers in true crime, history and the authors written about them in February, two thousand and nine
God, commercial, real estate challenges for one hundred and sixty years. Companies around the world have trusted, saddles for expert guidance and perfect workspace solutions, see what saddles can do for you at saddles dot us. I turcot a cardiologist, stabbed his two young children and Sophie Three and Olivier Olivier five hundred and forty six times while they were lying in their beds. Turcot admit to the killings, but in the subsequent murder trial he claimed he could not recall carrying them out. The guy Turcotte murder trial was one of the most closely followed in recent history in Canada, both horrifying and captivating the public. The jury deliberated for five days, decide thing on the fate of the cardiologist charged with first degree, murder in the deaths of his children. The trial hinged on Turcot state of mind at the time of the February, two thousand and nine slayings.
Was he trying to get revenge on his estrange wife, a fellow doctor for cheating on him with a mutual friend, or was he a sick man? At last? All reason, turkish lawyers argued he had been rendered temporarily insane. The recent break up of his marriage with Missis Gaskell in the July verdict, a jury thought he was not criminally responsible for his actions. In September Turcot faced a five person, mental health try funeral to determine whether he should be released or whether he should be detained for another year, as the Mental Health Tribunal decided, whether to set G Turcot free hundreds of protesters gathered fourteen Qubec City's calling for an overall of the justice system crown prosecutors are now so
making a retrial for Turcot, arguing that the judge erred in law in his instructions to the jury. The program this evening we discussing is not criminally responsible, travesty of justice, and if this will be an editorial program where I will welcome people to call in after they get the gist of the program, and that number is three hundred and forty seven, two hundred and thirty, seven four hundred and six four thousand three hundred and forty seven to thirty, seven thousand, four hundred and six for so, if you haven't, and once we get about- maybe one thousand and fifteen minutes into the program and your regular listener and want to weigh in on the subject itself on your opinion on what you think about this. Please carefully consider what has been said in the fifteen minutes, and then I welcome you to call in if you like, or just listen to the rest of the program,
as I think there will be some relevant issues for everybody listening right now. True crime fans everywhere will be interested in this case at our expense. Then why? Even people in America might find this shocking and I'll explain why? I think people in America might want to pay attention to this verdict in Canada. Now this guy Turcotte, like I it- is a prominent cardiologist living in Montreal, one of the biggest cities in Canada and he had discovered an email after his wife had filed for divorce or they were separated and this email. He found a confidential correspondence with his wife enemy actual friend of his and his wife, who she now he learned through this, the email was
She was carrying on an affair with this person that was his mutual friend and while mutual friend of both of them. So this created this precipitated this situation anyway. Now what guy Turcotte did was on the evening in question. Is he went online and researched how to commit suicide and apparently decided for some in the window? Washer fluid would do the trick and ingested some of this window, washer fluid and then again. This is the only way we will ever find. This out is from his account of what happened. He said he then condoms,
all of the life of his three year old daughter and his five year old son and thought that they would it would be horrible for them to not have a father. So in this twisted logic that he had at that time, he decided to stab them forty nine times altogether between two hundred and forty nine times so an obvious overkill. Forty nine times he stabbed his own children. Now, previous to this, he had it. Jenna separation been angered at his wife and
and came to the family home that he has now been locked out of his own home, and everyone can probably understand this would make most people angry. He punched his wife for now his Ex wife Miss Guest, all punched her in the face, so in some the current emails he had used the words. If you want a war, you're gonna have a war. Now I believe there is a difference in canadian love. Anybody listeners programme quite steadily will know that, in my opinion- and it's not even opinion factually this country starts with second degree murder and then
the seeds, with the possibility of manslaughter as a potential outcome, rarely are defended charged initially with our first to be murder. Now for those in the? U S, realising that first to be murder is disposed to be some. Wanna premeditation and that's where the Canadians get hung up on this. Well, there was no premeditation, and but in America, just a few seconds, just a split second of thirty seconds, a minute of any kind of planning would qualify then potentially and I'm dumbing down completely, and I apologize for those legal, those people that they know the law better than I that this would qualify potentially for first to be murder in this country, because we seem to have a different deafened,
mission. Of this first degree we will. We have is that we normally start with second degree murder charges and then, with the possibility for that defended of manslaughter in America, seems to be either in a death penalty, state first degree, murder, second degree, murder and, and then three different degrees
manslaughter- and I think that might even depend on state to state and being some differences, I'm not sure anyway, with it we getting back to deter caught now. What happened? Is there a way I mentioned in the opening that the the jury found a guitar God not criminally responsible for the killings? And you can ass well, how could he not be responsible if he admitted to the killings, because the state or our government has the onus to prove that he had the nest? Sorry intent to kill if he didn't have an intent to kill and again the state has to prove that he had the intent to kill,
not the other way around. He does not have to prove that he had no intent to kill. The state has to prove that he had an intent to kill without the intent to kill. There is no murder. Now the jury had the possibility of first degree, murder, which was charged with for the two children second degree, murder manslaughter, which is greatly reduced from murder in the of sentencing and then in this case, not criminally responsible. So the defense put forward psychiatric experts psychiatrist. It would we considered expert witnesses and they felt that in his altered states, I guess from the common
nation of the window. Washer fluid, but really it was the overall mental state that this person found themselves. In an odd moment, a out of character moment, Anne had stabbed his children. Forty nine times and the psychiatrist for the defense, along with the defense team and their strategy, convince the jury, and they must have done an adequate job for the jury, to believe that he was not criminally responsible for his actions. He did not have an intent to kill, apparently because of his altered. Thinking is altered state of mind and they were convinced that he was not criminally responsible now for those that listened last week
and for those that didn't I'll just do a little bit of a recap we're. I was interviewing a gentleman named Fred Rosen and for those that did comment, and quite a few people contacted me. Yes, the hour of the interview was two hours instead of one hour, because the one hour Fred seem to want to talk about everything bought his book for that hour. So I indulged him and I got caught up in in his tangents. I would say, but we talked about a lot of things and many many p full commented that they weren't so interested in this banter whatsoever. They really just enjoy hearing about the books from the authors and the authors explaining their books, but why bring up Fred Rosen is because Fred Rosen in his book acted like the consummate journalist and just presented the facts and let the audience the reader determine whether this
will killer Gary Hilton had a organic brain disorder, an event that precipitated him not being criminally response for his actions. Much years later, when, oddly enough, he seemed to become a serial killer at fifth theater, fifty nine years of age and went on to kill three or four people in total, and so when he has described this person as a cycle traffic devious con man ah ends up later being a killer. I found it surprising that Fred Rosen had concluded that, yes, this person wasn't, he didn't think, was criminally responsible for
his actions and certainly should not have been put on death row now. I don't want to get back into that debate or not, but he did have sympathy for this killer. An believed, the defense that he, that this killer Gary Hilton had had an injury that rendered him incapable of being responsible for his crimes later in life, for those murders, an eye- and they say even if you do agree with that, then what do we do now getting back to this case? It similar an this is the why I've drawn them both together is that if you believe that yes, this cardiologist this up, standing doctor a member of the community and I'm sure they provided ample evidence of this person not having murderous
reputation or intentions or background or behavior. That would indicate something like this that, if he's not criminally responsible for the deaths of his children, this was an odd moment out of character that he was consumed by his anger and depression, an rejection. What ever way you would like to describe it and now, in this particular case he is put into a mental institution, and a psychiatric tribunal is going to decide where they just goes home in a short period of time or he's kept for another year. As you read another year like something will go on in that year of treatment, so
I asked the question for our audience in for just for the listener for themselves to think and contemplate. What do you do with this person? That's not criminally responsible. If they just had an odd moment, then what we call in Canada, he would be not insane by any standards that we nor we apply. So if he's not insane per say, then he had an insane moment, and there has been the fact that I spoke about before, and Canada Insane Atomic ISM and non insane atomism, where basically the and is rendered a robot, not conscious in the normal state, not again response possible for their criminal actions. Because of this altered state, this automaton that they become,
but if there's an a non insane automatism, then this person snapped lost it as they go. We use whatever disk which in like an otherwise this person as psychiatrists, speak in Canada, not likely to re offend or not likely to re offend. I don't know how they can make that kind of conclusion, but my question is: what do we do with killer Gary Hilton? If we do conclude that, yes, he had an injury where something fell on his head and had two hundred stitches his head and that affected a certain portion of the brain and that certain portion of the brain is responsible for empathy b and sympathy and would render this person a cycle path without any conscience. Waht do do. We then do with these people that we've said they're not criminally
spots, always ninety days and in a mental institution determine whether these people are not, by definition insane than what do we do, and I think what we have in the decision in Montreal, Canada and I did throw in that. This was one of the most closely followed in recent history and Canada. That's incorrect. What happened was in fourteen cities in one province and we have ten or eleven provinces. What we have is the decision to in that in that province itself resonated among the primarily french canadian population that dominates Qubec in terms of population. Now, in fourteen cities there were- ah,
I don't even know how big I read. One was one hundred people at this protest. So the fact that that fourteen cities were going to have some form of protest is significant. In Canada there was a facebook page with twenty seven thousand signatures, for example, but to compare anything that resonates in the United States, some of the cases, the well the biggest, obviously the Casey Anthony case recently, but there have been many cases that have seemed to resonate with the public over the years and eh the year in every few months. There's some case that dominates the headlines and seems to captivate the imagination of people in America. We have a case here where, for the most part it was
reported National League and National NEWS story, and it just didn't seem too outrage the people of Canada. And again I don't know what would I'm even the Robert Picton case, all kinds of other incredible cases do not seem to have the ability or the power to outrage, an entire nation, to create debate, to create discussions to have some sort of political ramifications for something to change. The result of people complaining and protesting an calling out and an expressing their outrage. So what we have here actually is a primarily phenomenon that happened in one province in Canada and the rest were looking at this case for exam
simple, I'm sitting in the middle of Canada, and I talk and I'm talking to people and- and they mentioned, have you seen the Casey Anthony verdict. Well, Canadians are Americans, we watch the same television programmes were aware of the case. He had any case. Of course it isn't as important to us as Canadians as it is to Americans, especially in people in areas that were did in Florida and in that area, but we still it's a good example of someone randomly speaking to me about a key days and not being aware of a case. That should definitely give as much pause to consider but also listed so form of outrage once they were notified of this case that they weren't aware of this case
at all, but aware of the Casey Anthony case again, Casey Anthony was convicted on circumstantial evidence. This cardiologist killed his children admitted killing his children stab them forty nine times there is ample evidence and yet was decided in court of law by a jury as not criminally responsible. That's not the same as an acquittal, but in a lot of people's minds. If this person, this doctor is released in forty five ninety days and as some people, smoking in spoken in editorials he's likely to be able to be able to practice Medison again as well. Again, just maybe a little bit more outrage to add to the rage already anyway. What I think that the lesson is for me organs is that once you buy into the too much
tie a tree and its influence in the courts, this expert- witness is a battle of expert witnesses in terms of the the prosecution will have a psychiatrist that will claim the exact opposite and another psychiatrist for the defense will claim that. Yes, surely this person was not of their right mind and should be not criminally responsible, so it gets down to the entire trial. Coming down to two expert witnesses, an again we uh, we hold up psychiatry as some thing that we normally the Lehman does not understand whatsoever. So we have a hard time arguing or disputing any Saikia drink evaluation, so it is a matter of which psychiatric experts end up being the better witness at a trial, and these K.
This is either it can muddy the waters or it can certainly in this particular case, go from a first degree. Murder conviction to a not criminal, responsible, incredibly different outcome in terms of sentence and in every way, completely different for the victims and the families of the victims and did the entire judicial system itself I believe that if we buy into too much the excuses or not criminally responsible, what we have is well, then. What do we do in the case of Gary Hilton? What would we do if we were to believe that somehow or other this was not of his volition? It was not his fault that he robbed killed disposed of these human beings watt. What would we then do with him if we were to
in a mental institution. Then what is the sentence in the mental institution Talese well for a certain prescribed period of time? Would that do the trick? What would suffice and what would we all be able to agree on and probably not much, the idea that this person will be capable and then not, of course, not be responsible? Then we would say: well, then we would keep him in a mental institution, because we do not know what that person is capable love. In the case of this cardiologist we have a person that probably has a squeaky clean background? Nothing but stellar record of education and work, but regardless of that, I don't think that that should necessarily negate any kind of idea that this pie
listen cannot and will not at any other time in the future, re offend to some extent in this violent nature. That's just my take on it again. Probably the circumstances that that came together in this perfect storm to create this incredible murder of his children will probably exist again. Well, that's doesn't have any children left, there's likely not to happen again, but that does not mean that somehow or other a psychologist, can say with any kind of certainty that this person is again less likely to reoffend. That's a reason not to punish this person not to incarcerate this person for the killings of his children. So it is again. I think it's something. That's not an easy question,
not an easy decision, but I would like to know if anyone is listening to the program right now. Please give me a call at three hundred and forty seven, two thousand three hundred and seventy four sixty four and you can weigh in on this subject. Just for those that are going to be tuning in next week and in the near future and. May not listen to this entire programme. I want to tell you that coming up next week is again and on the program for an encore performance is RON francel with his latest book, a sour to cock scale, and it's a little bit different in that it really has nothing to do with any major murder or crime, but it really does have everything to do with RON french Cell, who is a best selling true crime, author of very good author author of the darkest night and delivered from evil and a host of other true crime books. He
is legion of fans. He's a very good bitter enemies are very good interview, and here told me on a previous program that he had planned was planning a trip with his son is a dream, a trip, a vacation one in a lifetime opportunity to go with his son to Alaska and the entire adventure. So I will use the opportunity, because he has a book called the sour tool cocktail and we will be able to talk to him about this life, changing experience that he had planned for many many years and how that went, and we will talk about his life writing his career writing, true crime. What he's learned what some of the surprises, some of the things that he did not anticipate, would happen in his journey as a trooper writer and we'll talk about his new books. Our two cocktail and the entire experience run Fred. So again, is it
need any view in a great Arthur and we're going to have on September twenty first, the book will be called the crime, boss, guide to the Outlaw Rockies so geographically speaking everywhere, that is important in true crime. History, too locations involved involving TED Bundy, the Columbine Mass here at a host of other famous, an infamous true crimes and where they existed, yogurt ethically and it's the crime buffs guide to the outlaw, Outlaw Rockies, it seems the West Coast. Has it incredible share of serial killers and their sordid stories October? Fourth is going to be the sourtoe cocktail, part of me for mixing up order of things. That's my friend self and again run friend cell September 21st.
Is there crime buffs guide to the outlawed Rockies, so that will be interesting, two books from a very, very good author RON friend cell. After that we were going to have at some point- and I just got the book today. It got sidetracked in the mail and she fast tracked me and uh copy. This is a case that again captured the imagination of the american people and in an international audience in a huge way. This is this: is the book about the trials of Amanda Knox and is the author is Nina Burleigh and it's called the fatal gift of beauty, and so it is the case of. The sexually violent murder of twenty one year old, british student, Meredith Kercher in Peru, ITALY, on the night of November first two thousand and seven uh story- became an
the national sensation when one of creatures, housemaids twenty Euro old Seattle Native Amanda Knox, as well as her italian boyfriend and a troubled Bokelmann Knox said she vaguely knew were arrested and charged with Meredith Kercher's murder. So that will be an interesting case. I don't know much about this case at all. I just didn't pay attention when I saw that news accounts, I really don't like hearing sensational headlines and not much follow up information, so I didn't pay attention to those coming from people like Nancy Grace ranting and raving at the top of her lungs about Amanda Knox and anyway, that will be a very, very interesting program that will come up very soon. I contacted someone just recently from someone that contacted me through blog
radio and suggested that I look into a book from an author named Yvonne Mason and it's called silent scream. So of course I followed that up. It looked like a very interesting story. Annan interesting book and Yvonne Mason will be on October, the 12th and with her book, silent, scream. And so we have a host of other possibilities trying to get the lawyer for John Wayne Gacy on his appeared on my friend and a friend of the program borough bear with his true crime, uncensored program with Don old men, in LOS Angeles. It had him on a full time. Sam is now a judge. He was a lawyer for the John Wayne Gacy and the infamous or famous John Wayne Gacy one
fascinating serial killers. Well time gave us a confession to SAM a morality taking SAM Amarante. The lawyer for John Wayne, Gacy very put him in a very, very awkward position, especially giving you trying to defend this. Guy right, so it will be a very interesting story. Anne Burrell's assured me that he will put the bug in the air for SAM Amarante who's now a judge, and we can talk about the John Wayne Gacy John Wayne Gacy case. Very very very fascinating murderer, an fascinating case in every single way. If you do get a chance, there is an excellent book. I've been trying to get this per and it still has a thriving law business to come on. He has written one of the classics: killer clown. His name is Terry Sullivan, and this is the book that you really
should read about. There are host the books about John Wayne Gacy, but if you do get a chance the cloud has been around for many many years. It is fantastic, scary, an unforgettable, so killer clown. Do yourself a favor if you haven't checked this out. This is one of the most incredible stories of all. So getting back to the guy Turcotte. Story, the cardiologist is stabbed his children, we have a peep. That I found interesting when I read articles about the case is that people were clamoring to be in attendance at this trial to get the Do you see that were in the in the courtroom to be able to guess what was going on and when those people were
interviewed afterwards. There was far there was an incredible amount of sympathy for the jury and for the juries v verdict itself and people see. To understand. So I don't know what I was missing out of this, but I know that it's a case that outrage me. Immediately after reading about this- and I really and disappointed that it hasn't gained more ground in the rest of Canada uh. We really should have major protests all across Canada for the ramifications of this trial. This true, as they say, I'm not sure sure, but legal experts say it's unlikely to become a precedent setting case, but regardless this seems to be the evolution of the can
in judicial system, where we see two more and more and more understand the killer, feel sorry for the killer, excuse the killer and- and I just think it's a wrong trend. I think it's the wrong dude action for our judicial system to go. We have a raining conservative government that has as come, the power on a top on crime platform and yet. Even though they've addressed a couple things that are very poor diplomatic in terms of a deal with a more serious criminals, they still I mean- is it
conservative as they are? They still do not seem to get what the people are upset about in Canada. They have no faith in the judicial system whatsoever. So they're, not. You know, they're, not consulting with Canadians to find out exactly what the Canadians would want. It's just a platform of tough on crime. Without really addressing that, we still don't have an actual life sentence. We don't have a mechanism that actually can keep anyone in for their entire life, regardless of how many murders they've done or how many rape they've done or how many children they have abducted in kidnapped and sexually assaulted it it doesn't seem to make any difference. We just
do not have in a bed, they can jar people's minds. Are the public mind into asking demanding that we actually have an axe life sentence without the possibility of parole and where we have? The problem is that we don't even have consecutive sentence ng if you've killed Robert Picton evidence of thirty. Three murders. He only has one murder conviction. It just seems ludicrous that someone would. I have to go through the motions, if you think, to give this grant this person a parole hearing when everyone knows that he is likely to not release from prison. Now, however, when you're comparing thirty three to one, we seem to then considered one, not so serious, a certain
the time in prison as rehabilitation, even though it's just a certain amount of time in prison, uh, and so the people are eventually released back into the community and that's the kind of language we talk about. All these people will eventually be released back in in the community, so we have to prepare them for the community. We have to let them out a couple of years before their earliest parole date to prepare them for there an eventual release into the community. We. Ended our death penalty sometime in the fifties and in RE bill terms in practice and then officially in the in the 60s, and so at that time we also throughout actual license. So we went from having the death penalty too, not having an actual life sentence and then somewhere
along the line. I do not know how this could have been justified. We don't even have consecutive sentencing even for multiple murder. And in the evolution has is, has been the gradual. We were a very punitive country, harsh sentences or even minor crime, not so long ago, thirty years ago, forty years ago, twenty five years ago, so we have seemed to think we've evolved into this kinder gent, sure population that believes in restorative justice, rather than punitive and justice, and we don't believe in deterrence as much as rehabilitation. I believe in all these concepts for certain crimes. That certainly are more apt to be reasonable for
rehabilitation. If someone were to steal- and you were to make them work and to pay back restitution for the for the the money that they would have stolen, and if these people have to come to the decision that if they were to go to jail, then they would have to work. So when they are free, then they have the decision to work and make much more money an and enjoy their freedom. I think it's a simple. I I think it's oversimplifying the situation, but there are people that can rehabilitate themselves from looking at the options. Looking at the pros and the cons when we're talking about killers and rapists and pedophiles and psychopathic personalities in general that have no conscience that would rip off your granny of every cent that she has an not
anything of it and people that have no conscious when it comes to these violent crimes. Then we're talking about people that you know, even the experts will say these people can't be rehabilitated. So I think that when we in America, those that would like to again, I don't believe in the death penalty. Is there are errors- and I don't want to have that on my hands, but I do understand the thirst or the desire for the death penalty for these heinous crimes for these unconscionable killers. I do understand it coming from the victims, families or from other people that are affected or from society in general, and I do also understand it. It is a safeguard for somebody who might be a liberal minded governor to maybe let these people loud or up can use their sentence or
maybe again a liberal minded appeals court. So I understand that, but at the same time I think that we have. I think it should be adequate, that you were too incarcerate this person for their natural life in a cell in a in a prison. I think has to be in it just has to be enough, because really what we're talking about is not deterrence. It's not rehabilitation.
It's not denunciation, it is protectionist society. So I think that's what we have to keep our people are. I focused on is that it's just public safety? It's not revenge. It's not punishment, it's not retribution, so I think that's what we're going to do is going to have something in Canada. Just to have a spark, an outrage in Canada, some case that hasn't happened before, like I say that Robert picked in the Bernardo Homolka case again very very outrageous. The case I was involved with Sidney, Tear Hughes, the psycho Kill,
who wanted to write his letters and be famous and butchered a human just to do so: Clifford Olson, who killed ten children and then blackmailed the government into paying him ten thousand dollars per body, ten bodies, ten thousand dollars per body, to show them where those graves were, and this person still laughing at the federal government, just told the federal government last year that he'd been saving up a pen in old age pension while he was in prison. Of course, he tough on crime government had no idea, so we have these people that are reviled, but we only have a handful of these cases and we don't seem too learn much from them. There isn't much real they'd other, then you know. Well, how could you
these people become? Who they are, and I couldn't tell by looking at them and they seem to be so normal. Our latest case was a a prestigious colonel in the military, Colonel Williams, who was raped, raping and kill playing his neighbors when they finally caught up to him. This offender shared a lot of the characteristics of btk where he would have. He was into the souvenirs and trophies he would go into his neighbors home and try on the young, daughters, clothes posing the clothes, take photos of the clothes he lay. Their graduated escalated to rape, forcible confinement, video tape, his crimes and then later he gradual, headed to murder and they finally caught up with them and of course
he exhibited all of the characteristics of you know very unique serial killer, and this person now is sitting in prison. The trial happen very quickly. Unlike a lot of cases, he didn't have it fence lawyer. That was pleading not guilty on his behalf. He gave a confession once he realized there could be some problems for his wife. He wanted to lessen the burden for his wife, Anne Anne. The interviewing officer did uh remarkable job of indicating the position that he was really in them. Military was outraged that this person, bearing the being a decorated officer the shame,
brought to the military, and so I think they had a major influence in him, not mounting any kind of defense, and that this case really happened occurred fairly quickly and ended fairly quickly, and the book is out and there's not much debate about about this in the debate- a really ensued, and that was what could have made this. You know again. Successful military person become this other person. I don't think that's the question we all can just watch Dexter episodes are realised it it through many of the true crime stories that are that people have written books about that. A lot of these psychopathic killers have military backgrounds. It's not that surprising whatsoever that somebody could be a respectable business men or a reverend or
the wife would know. Well, we can get that on investigation, discovery program after program after program of wife, saying he was a great father. He was a good husband. I had no idea so again. We can get over that one, because that's a popular refrain. I had no idea. He doesn't look like a serial killer. I knew him since we were young. Of course, these people do not reveal themselves, and that's just all you can say these people are manipulative there clever for the most part, and this is something that they do, that I don't think anybody could imagine that their friends would be capable of doing and how could? Why? Would you even imagine something like that? So that's all we seem to learn
these things and the especially in Canada. The judicial system, like I had mentioned to Bernardo Homolka case again, that Karla Homolka, was depicted as a battered woman against undue influence of psychiatry in the courtroom itself. Robert Picton course this. Gayatri. We had nothing to do with that case. It was, he didn't really say much, except the boast to an undercover officer that one more and he woulda had fifty That is more a case of the police, ignoring experts saying that there,
the serial killer, loose the police, ignoring victims, families, because, of course the victims were, I hate to say it hookers an it's, not some sort of police directive to ignore the murders of people considered less important in society, but it just is human nature to not consider the drug addict or the street prostitute, or it's just in the name sure of some people to ignore information coming from people that they do not consider trustworthy or reliable in terms of information. So it's it's it's human nature to dismiss some people and what they say. But you really do have this systemic situation where they did ignore for that there was a serial killer running around in back
we're killing women and did not respond. Until well. Well till it was too late and they could have saved lives by responding and doing things differently. So it doesn't seem like we have the focus, the concerted media attention on some of these cases and analysis. I found one article about this guy Turcotte verdict where the person didn't agree with that verdict whatsoever, so I think that the I think that by and large either people were not aware they were, or just did not resonate with them at all that again, this year
years of of ignoring these sorts of cases, and in not being personally involved, has. Created a situation where we have this stay, where we fair amount of people do not understand these verdicts. Another group of people are so far hi they dont. Even aren't you aware of these verdicts, and then you have a good group of people that been seemed to be groomed by the uh bleeding heart liberals, as I can call them people that always seem to believe the excuses of killers and some of these criminals and and want to believe that everyone is essentially good. So they don't have this same. I guess healthy dose of cynism, where
there are in my mind and a lot of people that are in the no police officers, correctional officers. Obviously certain defence lawyers people. There must be of a good group of people that realise that there are these kinds of people that cannot be fixed. That cannot be rehabilitated an maybe we can't even understand, and we just need to in sure that they're locked away for public safety and that's it. But we have a phenomenal here in Canada that a combination of factors has evolved so that we have no outrage over a verdict like this of any magnitude whatsoever. Again uh, some editorials, I'm sure I didn't monitor every radio station. But again, if
believe that, if I were to look at the an exam in the content of that criticism, it would be criticism at a much lower, unfocused level than where it. I believe it really should be, and that's the system itself, the direction, the undue influence of psychiatry and, of course, our acceptance of psychiatric expert as the expert that Trump's all others again, we have police, they make their decision. Yes, this is a homicide. Prosecution says yes, this is this is something that we can prosecute murder and then they did. The chess game that has evolved in this country then takes
where, where it's there so many reasons to excuse murder, if the state has to prove in tat the kill, if alcohol reduces the that intend to kill, if provocation reduces that intend to kill we also don't have laws where the person that drove the car up to the home invasion. People go in and kill somebody, and it come back out that persons not involved and in America there's this instant connection. If you're involved in the commission of a rate involved in the commission of a murder, pardon me a theft and a homicide occurs, then you are responsible for that. Homicide, so
seems to be that the american judicial system assigns more responsibility for crime and the purpose or any Canada. We have this phenomena and again and ever worsening trend and direction of excusing. Almost anyone of anything we have the must be header who cannibalized and cut off a person's head on a bus and the psychiatric industry here in Canada, and this is read it in with a pig itself where I reside and they are hell bent on making this their pet project where they claim that we have medication that will render this killer cannibal harmless on medication and monitoring and right now, he's been in
incarcerated in a mental institution for a little over a year again making arrangements so that this person is escorted on the grounds that have no fence have no precautions to protect to anyone in the surrounding area and this person there hell bent on taking this person out for walks for fresh air. They can't just simply open the window for this person and I pose the question if they have medication that renders a Hannibal Lecter who have to be insane who's capable of cannibalizing and murdering someone on a greyhound bus. We.
Then there should be no one in the mental institution whatsoever. I mean it's just open up the doors hand out those meds and say see you later, because if this guy can be rendered harmless through medication, then it seems to be that there is no crime whatsoever where the perpetrator could not be rendered harmless with the aid of medication. So I think it's ridic With this trend and this conclusion that somehow because they're not promote responsible, then what are we? going to do it's unconscionable for us to lock them in a mental institution to say that they have to be in that mental institution till we determined that they're not insane that they have no mental health issues. Instead, we're throwing
caution to the wind and hoping that all our theories about be abilitation and so Kya Tree and and these wonder drugs from the pharmaceutical companies will do their job, and I do not by into this for a second and I believe that if this sort of mindset hen can be accepted. Oh here, I might say that America, at any time in the near future, will have this same situation in their laps. But you can see
that there are a fair amount of people. If a true crime- author, a noted journalist, a veteran true crime, author, examines the case of serial killer Gary Hilton realizes that this person robbed, it may have tortured. Had a van set up for document. This person sped a fair amount of time, calculating what he was going to do inflicting pain to rob these person first of their atm cards and then ask him for the push them for the numbers and then, when he didn't need these people anymore, he killed them a cold and calculating serial killer. That an author who is handled the case or written about the case.
Attended the trial, looked at all the evidence and then that person says you know I don't think he's criminally responsible again then what no? What do we do with the serial killer? Who's killed? Four people. What do we do with a cardiologist, that's capable of stabbing his children, forty nine times, or what do we do Do we say well we're going to put them in an institution indeterminate amount of time and then again a psychiatric tribunal, psychiatry,
again, the people that believed he was not criminally responsible are now going to again the same occupation. The same professionals from the same mindset are going to determine when this person is able to go out in the community again these people so convinced that they have this incredible medicine, incredible drug that renders people harmless, that were capable of sawing off a person's head and then cannibalizing certain body parts. A cardiologist because his wife is screwing around with his friend figures, I'll drink window. Washer fluid did he know that was not going to kill him. Did he re? realize that? Did you go on the internet to make up an excuse for later in his defense.
Does he know that much about the law? Does it even matter because the logic that was the logical might my kids won't have a father, so I'll take em out will then take why? Why did you stem forty nine times again? Is that evidence of an unclear mind and because he was, is the overkill evidence that he was insane temporarily? Should we excuse temporary insanity? Can't we all say we were temporarily insane that we don't quite remember everything when we do flip out when we do get I don't do get so angry that we throw the telephone against the wall when we grab. Someone could use all these at the fence.
What we all use that it's incredible, the development and the influence of psychiatry in court decisions. There is no cat scan, there's no brain scan to determine. Some of these things, so it is open to a certain amount, a fair amount, maybe an incredible amount of interpretation, an opinion. Obviously, if you have a psychiatrist for the defense, if a psychiatrist for the prosecution and they disagree well, then it's not so clear cut. It's obviously not determine Obel by an x ray we're brain scan. So again, it's not conclusive.
What these people are saying, it's their expert opinion and then we render these. The court renders them experts, experts in cycle de in psychiatry and the mind and how the mind works. So I'm night. I'm not speaking to a primarily a canadian audience, I'm glad I'm not speaking to a canadian audience, because I I don't have much patience for people that just can accept just buy their nature, the goodness of everyone and an and again, by extension, the honesty
the psychiatrist in the the again. The ethics of the lawyer. That everybody is, nobody is try to get their client off. If your client is guilty of no impetus, there's no motivation, these people to actually lie or evade incarceration or obeyed, telling the truth. This cardiologist has a successful career he's he's a doctor. He's probably helped a lot so what it doesn't matter. He's not any better than anyone else, because we're dealing with this hey his crime and two children dead. This Gary Michael help. Him was a con man, but he served in the Vietnam war.
He got an honorable discharge, so technically is a war hero or you serve this country. So again, Gary Michael Hilton is not guy turcot, but in the end, both these people murdered. Both these people calculated to a certain degree there, both killers. What do we do? Gary Michael Hilton, get the death penalty guide, turn we'll be out in a short period of time, and will it be practising medicine again. Even more outrage now I notice that no one called in this evening- and I should have put up that this was kind of program that I could.
I would ask for people to call in, and I know that not too many people listen to the program live but listen to it archive at their own convenience. So if there are any one that would like to weigh in give me an opinion about what about the program itself and what they believe about some of the commentary meant tonight, it would mean a lot to me if I could get that again. Last week, I do apologize for the guest going off on a tangent me not being able to corral him back, but for those people would like to listen in the second hour. We do cover his book completely very much like I know they do in a programme and all talk about Canada and all the talk about America and the guest apologizing for Americans
really recalled a lot of the listeners out there listening to the programme. So I apologise for bringing politics into the equation at all, because that's not really what we're here. For that being said, I did an editorial programme because I possess believe it case really clearly demonstrates the situation that we're in here in Canada, the differences in our judicial systems and the differences in people's attitudes towards these types of crimes and these types of verdicts. So I wanted to bring that to the attention of my mostly american, an international audience, and you can compare it to the jurisdictions that you are in and it again if you were outraged over this verdict and
what I have to say- or you just disagree with me vehemently and like the set me straight. Please contact me and I'd be more than happy to respond to your comments and I welcome them. I want to thank you very much for listening tonight, even listen to the programme to murder the more shocking killers in programme history and the others are written about them. Thanks for joining me good night,
Transcript generated on 2019-12-05.