A case making newspaper headlines tends to illustrate the conflict between what the law requires and what the community expects when it concerns the release from prison of an offender who has served time for the murder of a child.
A man was released in December of 2009 after serving sixteen years for the brutal murder of a young boy. At the time there was an outcry from those connected with the victim and strict parole conditions applied. One of those conditions stipulated that the released offender must not have a close relationship or have any form of control over other children.
The parolee settled in a country town far removed from the crime scene and changed his name. We can presume that he was under some sort of supervision from the parole authorities, and yet somewhere along the line he established a relationship with a young woman - and eventually moved in with her. The sticking point was - this woman had two young children from a previous relationship, and he did not disclose to her the fact that he was a former notorious murderer of a child.
When this information surfaced he was immediately arrested, and he will face court for breaching a child protection order. He may face a short term in prison, but inevitably he will again be released - and it will be impossible for him to return to that country town now that he is known by his new name and all the facts have been disclosed.
It raises the question of just what should happen to those who commit a horrible crime, serve their time - and are then returned to the community !
The law states that when a court delivers a verdict, the sentence must be served - and the person is then released to start a new chapter in their life. Conditions apply, but as we well know integrating anyone guilty of a child crime back into the community can be almost impossible. Public hysteria can lead to vigilante action.
In this case, we are dealing with the unknown. It is quite possible that this man may have become a valued step-father and these two children might have grown to maturity in safety - but it is also possible that the liaison could have led to tragedy. The law required him to walk away from that liaison as soon as he became aware that children were involved, but that is a lot to ask a lonely man trying to establish a new life - and a new relationship.
Fortunately this conflict between the law and society only applies to those who harm children - and such cases are in the minority. Ordinary criminals - and there are plenty of them - ease back into society seamlessly because a different set of standards apply.
It seems that child murder is a crime with a similar ending to the fable of the ghost ship - " The Flying Dutchman " - destined to sail the world's seas indefinitely.
Like that ship - the perpetrators are destined to wander society - unwanted - for an eternity !
No comments:
Post a Comment