Fathers for Life
Fatherlessness, the lack of natural fathers in children's lives
| Home | In The News | Our Blog | Contact Us | Share

Fathers for Life Site-Search

Site Map (very large file)
Table of Contents
Children—Our most valued assets?
Educating Our Children for the Global Gynarchia
Child Support
Civil Rights & Social Issues
Family Law
Destruction of Families
Divorce Issues
Domestic Violence
Gay Issues
Hate, Hoaxes and Propaganda
Help Lines for Men
Law, Justice and The Judiciary
Mail to F4L
Men's Issues
The Politics of "Sex"
Our Most Popular Pages
Email List
References - Bibliography

You are visitor

since June 19, 2001


Two Brands of Compassion, Outrage and Justice

1998 11 30,
Walter H. Schneider

In an article in the online edition of the National Post, 1998 11 28, Christie Blatchford produced a magnificent piece of media hype that all-in-one managed to project from an instance of anecdotes told by one of her friends to all Saskatchewan citizens the attribute of heartless killers of kittens, to Saskatchewan hog farmers who presently go bankrupt in record numbers the attribute of being materialistic whiners on account of "their chosen employment," and to Robert Latimer by extension the attribute of a heartless killer from whom we can't expect any different on account of him being an inhabitant of Saskatchewan, a hog farmer and having a placid face to boot.

The article, because so many comparisons can be made to other similar cases in whom the mothers, not the fathers, are in the majority the perpetrators of child murders, prompted me to write a letter to the National Post.

Subject: Robert Latimer -- Two brands of justice and outrage
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 09:03:57 -0800
From: Walter Schneider < >
To: online@nationalpost.com, Mention <mention@vicnet.net.au>

Dear National Post,

Re: No suffering in Robert Latimer
He applied the law of the farm to a human being

As the article by Christie Blatchford at http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary.asp?f=981128/2059559 indicates, she feels that the original sentence of two years less a day for Robert Latimer was bizarre.  It appears that she is far more comfortable with his current sentence of 25 years, with no chance of parole for ten years of that term.

It is wrong that anyone kills a human being.  What makes Robert Latimer's crime even more abhorrent is that he killed his own daughter.  However, would Christie Blatchford have been more comfortable if a stranger like Dr. Kevorkian would have done the deed?  Is she as outraged about "bizarre" sentences when the latter gets off time and again on murder charges in his series of about 130 killings by now?

However, what is truly bizarre about the Robert Latimer case is the two brands of justice that are being applied in "merci-killings" in Canada.  It would be great if Christie Blatchford would bless us with her opinions about the truly bizarre circumstances that allow for someone like Mrs. Getkate to get off with the murder of her husband with a total time of eleven days spent incarcerated.  Even more bizarre, Danielle Blaise, who deliberately killed her 2 1/2 year-old son, identically afflicted, although apparently not as severely, [see note] as Robert Latimer's daughter, spent no time in jail at all and  received the "bizarre" sentence of about 60 days of counselling sessions that she had to attend on weekends, to help *her* to get over the trauma of the deed she had done.  Did anyone suggest counselling for Robert Latimer to help him get over his trauma?

Danielle Blaise deliberately drowned her son at about the same time that Robert Latimer deliberately gassed his daughter.  Is no jail-time for drowning one's child not a bizarre sentence?  Should Robert Latimer perhaps have chosen that method for the execution of his daughter rather than to gas her?  Perhaps Robert Latimer shouldn't have claimed that he killed his daughter out of compassion for her suffering and should have simply claimed the same motivation that Danielle Blaise used, that he simply couldn't cope anymore.

It would probably have been far more expedient for Robert Latimer to have had a sex-change operation before he executed his daughter, than to submit himself to the consequences of having done his deed while he was a man.  However, that fact may still provide some hope to him.  If he does serve his sentence, as a federal prisoner he'll be entitled to get a sex-change operation at no cost to himself.  If he should go through with that, he'll be able to obtain the same level of compassion that is routinely extended to murderesses and will probably increase his chances of getting an early release or perhaps even to be pardoned, unless we don't then forgive him the sin of ever having been a man.  That is truly bizarre, but it also helps explain that the ratio of incarceration in Canadian prisons is 100 men for every woman.  In the US, that ratio is 18.6 : 1.

Most bizarre of all is the fact that Robert Latimer's crime continues to receive so much attention in the media by people like Christie Blatchford, whereas the media has long forgotten Danielle Blaise's name, crime and victim.  Nevertheless, the victims in both cases are equally dead, righteous media outrage and inequitable justice or not.


Walter H. Schneider

Note:  On account of the large number of reports that I have on hand, of mothers who murdered their children and got off lightly or with no punishment at all, it seems that I became a little confused.  I would like to make a few corrections of pertinent facts in the Danielle Blaise case.  Her name is Danielle Blaise, her son's age was six, his name Charles-Antoine Blaise, and his affliction was autism.

I received a number of inquiries about Danielle Blaise's case of murdering her son.  That prompted me to find out a little bit more information about both cases, that of Danielle Blaise and that of Robert Latimer.

Here is a reference to the Blais case that quotes the Ottawa Citizen, at http://www.pcs.mb.ca/~ccd/ottciti.html

It is stated in the article that:

    "Blais, of Montreal, tried unsuccessfully to commit suicide after the child died and has been charged with first-degree murder.  She is receiving treatment for depression.
        She was portrayed by the mainstream media as a loving mother who reached her breaking point.  That is most surely true, but that means her support system was inadequate, not that a bathtub should have been filled with water. "

These sentiments are typical with respect to comments pertaining to Danielle Blais, but there are few comparably benign comments about Robert Latimer.  He is a man, therefore he is without any doubt guilty and worthy of being punished to the full extent of the law.  Nevertheless, what all comments about Danielle Blais ignored is the very high frequency of bathtubs being either the murder weapon or the location used in the murder of children when these are killed by their mothers.  What these comments ignore as well is the fact that few women succeed in committing suicide, but that in the majority of attempted suicide by women help is usually summoned in sufficient time, even if the method of suicide chosen should otherwise be deadly, to effect rescue with a wide margin of safety.

Peter Mansbridge blissfully ignores that there had been many more cases like the Latimer case when he states in the lead-in to the Dec 02, 1998 "The National": "Still ahead, in tonight's news: is Quebec discriminating against students from other provinces? And Robert Latimer's unprecedented sentence. Is it a one off, or will there be more?"

The following table juxtaposes the details of the CBC post-trial coverage of the murders of Charles-Antoine Blais and Tracy Latimer.  The text shown in italics is mine.

The Murder of Charles-Antoine Blais

— as per the CBC program "The National" [transcript of program] (The URL is also shown right after this table)

The Murder of Tracy Latimer

— as per the CBC program "The National" [transcript of program] (The URL is also shown right after this table)


Treatment for mother who killed autistic son. 


Debate over Robert Latimer's sentence.

Danielle Blais' case had received little attention in the media and was hardly known. Robert Latimer's case had received much media attention, and his  name was a household word already.
Guests: MARK KELLEY, CBC Reporter 
ROBERT LA HAYE, Defence Lawyer 
LYNNE BRABANT, Mother Of Autistic Child 
Guests: ERIC SORENSEN, CBC Reporter, 
Vox Pop (Voice of ) JUSTICE TED NOBLE, 
ANNE McLELLAN, Min. Of Justice, 
BRYAN SCHWARTZ, University Of Manitoba 
Relatively unknown reporter, unknown and low-profile guests Well-known reporter, high-profile guests, but defence lawyer not included

The Introduction

SUHANA MEHARCHAND: A judge in Quebec ruled today that a woman who killed her young disabled son will not go to jail. As Mark Kelley reports, the crown prosecutor, defence lawyers and parents of other autistic children agree with the sentence. 

The Introduction

PETER MANSBRIDGE: Lots of debate today about the sentence a judge handed to Robert Latimer yesterday.  Latimer was given two years less a day for second-degree murder.  That's far less that the mandatory minimum of ten years.  As we hear from Eric Sorensen, the talk today ranged from the legal issue to political questions, to the ethics of Latimer's act and the court's decision. 

It is explained what the case is all about,  what the consequences are—no jail time—and that there is general agreement by the major interested parties as to the appropriateness of the lack of severity of the sentence.
   What is remarkable is the lack of any discussion of the severity of the sentence in comparison to other trials for identical crimes. 
No indication is provided that many people who commit murder are often  indicted for the more serious charge of murder, not manslaughter.  Let's not forget here that Danielle Blais deliberately drowned her son.  That makes it premeditated murder, not manslaughter.  Doesn't it amaze anyone that she was indicted for the latter?
No explanation is required as to what the case is all about.  People know that already.  The sentence is announced along with the fact that it is far less than the mandatory sentence demands for the charge of murder that had been laid.
   What is remarkable is the lack of any discussion of the severity of the sentence in comparison to the results of other trials for identical crimes. 
   No indication is provided that many people who commit murder get routinely off with a less serious indictment, starting with no indictment at all to total absolution if an indictment for a far lesser category of crime for the same deed is made. (I. e.: Infanticide)

The Background

MARK KELLEY: This is the police photo of Danielle Blais, taken just hours after she killed her only child. Last November, Blais drowned six-year-old Charles Antoine in a bathtub, then she slashed her own wrists but survived.  Her son was autistic. 
     He went from extreme hyperactivity to extreme withdrawal. The boy's father left them, her babysitters kept quitting. Blais sunk into clinical depression. She was convicted of manslaughter, and today she was sentenced to 23 months in this halfway house. Here, she'll receive psychiatric treatment. 

The Background

ERIC SORENSEN: For weeks, the Latimers walked the gauntlet of reporters and cameras.  But today, all was quiet at the family farm.  Laura Latimer wasn't talking in public.  And 40 kilometers away, her husband was in no position to talk publicly, locked up in an RCMP jail cell.  But others are still debating Robert Latimer's decision to kill his daughter, who was disabled and in pain. 

Danielle Blais, as far as I know, was never incarcerated even prior to the trial.  The background provided here goes into the details of the burden that the poor boy had been to his mother, but the details provided say simply only that the boy was autistic.  Was he ambulatory?  Could he eat by himself?  In another report it was stated that Danielle Blais was unhappy that the boy's teachers had no compassion for his problems.  That means that he was attending school and that his mother was not saddled with looking after him for 24 hours per day. The report by the CBC's "National" doesn't mention anything about the details of the circumstances that led to Tracy Latimer's death.  Tracy was twelve and severely afflicted by cerebral palsy.  She couldn't communicate, couldn't eat by herself, couldn't sit by herself, couldn't walk.  It isn't clear that she could hear, although she smiled at times, it isn't clear what she smiled about.  Robert Latimer, Tracy's father, decided to place Tracy into the cab of his pick-up truck and to gas her to death with exhaust fumes.  It appears that the question of whether his wife was involved in the plotting of the death of Tracy was never asked.

The Discussion

ROBERT LA HAYE / DEFENCE LAWYER: She's not a criminal; she's only a sick person and she still has to re-integrate herself into society. 

KELLEY: The Crown had asked for a three-year jail term to send a message to other parents, but Mr. Justice Jean Falardeau refused.  In sentencing Blais, he wrote: "I have much difficulty believing prison will dissuade someone who is sick."  He added, "clearly the defendant doesn't represent a danger to society, she could even work to help other parents of autistic children."

The Discussion

UNIDENTIFIED: And I've got two disabled kids myself. They're not as bad as what Robert's are, but if they were ever that bad, I'd have to think about it. 

SORENSEN: And many more are now wrestling with Judge Ted Noble's decision to sentence Latimer to just two years for murder. 

UNIDENTIFIED: I think the penalty was inadequate. It should have been more severe. 

UNIDENTIFIED Voice on radio: Well the decision, I don't mind saying, surprised me. 

SORENSEN: The legal debate was also taken up on radio talk shows. 

UNIDENTIFIED (Voice on radio): As of now, we have a Canadian judge who has basically struck down the sentence for second-degree murder. 

SORENSEN: Yesterday, Judge Noble went out of his way to explain why he ignored the Criminal Code provisions for murder, and why -- as can be heard on this court recording, he granted Latimer a constitutional exemption. 

(Voice of ) JUSTICE TED NOBLE: "I have concluded that the mandatory minimum sentence for second degree murder in the circumstances of this case is grossly disproportionate.  It is important that it be understood that this decision only relates to this accused in respect of this crime." 

SORENSEN: In Ottawa, there were prickly questions about the Latimer sentence. 

PAUL FORSETH / BC REFORM MP: Does the Criminal Code have meaning?  Or do judges just select terms to their liking? 

ANNE McLELLAN / MIN. OF JUSTICE: Mr. Justice Noble made it plain that his decision was fact-specific, and those provisions of the Code in question remain in full force and effect. 

There you have it.  Although Danielle Blais has been convicted of the crime of manslaughter, her lawyer affirms that she is not a criminal.  That would make her a victim of a justice system gone awry.  It seems to me that if the judge felt that she was sick, that a mistrial took place, because a sick person can't be a criminal.  He could at worst be criminally insane.  Let's first acknowledge that in this post-mortem trial by media, Robert Latimer has no representation at all.  The defence lawyer is absent from the discussion. 
   Then it must be asked why this case, which had identical motives and results, compared to the Danielle Blais case, required such high caliber participants in the post-mortem trial by media. 
   Why is it that Robert Latimer didn't warrant the same considerations that were used in Danielle Blais' case?   Why was his case not considered to be manslaughter?  Why is it that his sentence wasn't commuted to a 23 months-term in a halfway house?  Why was he indicted for murder?  Why is he not also considered to be no danger to society? 
   Why is it that public sentiment in all of those anonymous comments was that his sentence was far too light? 
   Why was Robert Latimer's case discussed in the House of Commons and Danielle Blais' case wasn't? 
   Why did Paul Forseth not take the opportunity to make political hay in Danielle Blais' case and call for a heavier sentence?

The Conclusion

KELLEY: Lynne Brabant says she understands what Blais went through. Her 16-year-old son Jeremy is autistic. For years, he rarely slept. He'd lie awake screaming at night, and spend his days creating havoc at home. While Brabant doesn't condone killing, she does condemn the Quebec government for cutting support programs for parents like her and Blais. 

LYNNE BRABANT / MOTHER OF AUTISTIC CHILD: What happened to Danielle Blais may very likely happen again, very likely. And it's like, I hope it won't be me. 

KELLEY: Parents of autistic children are giving Blais more than their support -- they're also giving her a job. They want her to represent their association so she can provide other parents with the kind of help she said she never had. 

—Mark Kelley, CBC News, Montreal. 

The Conclusion

SORENSEN: Legal scholars were studying Judge Noble's ruling today, and many have concluded it will not open the floodgates to more exemptions from the law. 

BRYAN SCHWARTZ / UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA: Usually if there's something wrong with the law, the court will address the problem with the law and not deal with just the particular one-fact circumstance.  So I don't think you're going to see a whole raft of demands for constitutional exemptions in other cases. 

SORENSEN: Among the flurry of legal opinions about Robert Latimer's sentence, the one viewpoint that matters most at the moment isn't being expressed yet.  That's the view from Saskatchewan's crown prosecutor's office.  Laura Latimer hopes the crown won't appeal, but the director of public prosecutions says his office will go back over the case and the judge's ruling, so a decision on the appeal won't be made for about two weeks. 

—Eric Sorensen, CBC News, Battleford, Saskatchewan. 

A considerable amount of sympathy was expressed for Danielle Blais.  The foregone conclusion appears to be that she is a woman in distress and therefore a victim of her own circumstances.
   Why is it that Mark Kelly doesn't mention how severely Charles-Antoine was afflicted by autism?  Without knowing that, no comparison can be made to the severity of Lynn Brabant's travails, and her comments become virtually meaningless. 
   It is interesting that Danielle Blais received job offers, to have her speak to parents of autistic children.  What kind of help do the parents of autistic children expect to get from her?
No sympathy of any kind is expressed for Robert Latimer.  The foregone conclusion that isn't even mentioned is that what Robert Latimer did was very bad, and that he must be punished severely to the full extent of the law, if possible perhaps even more severely than the law permits.
   There are no job offers for him.  The concerns expressed in the whole discussion center on the fact that Justice Noble gave a sentence that was less than what the charges warranted.  The only final comment is that  Eric Sorensen speculates whether Robert Latimer's sentence will be appealed by the crown prosecutor. 

Epilogue (April 23, 2001)

The death of Charles-Antoine Blais and the name of Danielle Blais, his mother who killed him, have been forgotten.
   The fate of Danielle Blais, who had no other children and no husband at the time, is not publicly known.
   As a single woman who is no longer burdened by her autistic son, and as the recipient of counselling, she should have had no trouble to get her life back in order.
The case of Tracy Latimer's death and the name of her father who killed her are still very much in the news.
   There have been some complaints by opponents of euthanasia that Tracy's name is not being mentioned often enough.
   The sentence given to Robert Latimer, 25 years imprisonment with no chance of parole for ten, has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada. 
   There is renewed interest in Robert Latimer's case, on account of some people having offered to serve each one month of his sentence.
   Mrs. Latimer and the other two children of the Latimer family have to try and survive without the presence of the husband and father.  Given that the family made a living off their farm — something that is increasingly difficult to do under the best of circumstances and almost impossible without a father around — they will for the rest of their lives suffer from the aftermath of Tracy's death, even if Robert Latimer should survive his life sentence.

Update 2006 05 14

Chilling perspectives on "Ethics"

In case of a deadly flu pandemic, whom should we save?

Once-upon-a-time a question like that never came up, except in totalitarian nations such as the USSR, Red China and Nazi Germany.  The presence of universal moral standards in the cultural heritage of the West ensured that the answer to such a question was, women and children first, then the elderly, the weak and the sick.  We fought wars to preserve that as a right of humanity, to ensure the abolition of slavery and the right of everyone to life and liberty.  That had made our society reach the heights it attained before its fall.  However, those standards no longer exist.  Now the legalization of euthanasia, assisted suicide and rigorous culling to establish the survival of the fittest is the norm in our brave-new world. 
    In the name of science it is now rationalized that rigorous selective culling is needed on the basis of economics, not survival of the weak on moral grounds.  The outcomes of such practices are similar to those that the Nazis hoped to achieve, for similar reasons; only the methods differ.  The Nazis actively killed those that were and in our brave-new world we actively withhold the means to keep alive those that are deemed not worthy to let live, although in the rationalizing for the eradication of the right to life of the weakest of all, those not yet born, we have already shown ourselves to be far more ruthless than the Nazis ever were.
    Still, vestiges of our largely vanished great cultural aims still exist, or else it would not be that the proposal by Ezekiel Emanuel and Alan Wertheimer (in the journal Science, May 12, 2006) sparked as much public discussion as it did.  (The discussion is still growing.  A May 13, 2006 search per the preceding link provided 539 entries in the search return list. Sixteen hours later, May 14, the entries in the return list for the search had grown to 572.)

 1) CBC Coverage of Blaise http://www.tv.cbc.ca/national/pgminfo/trans/T970702.html

 2) CBC Coverage of Latimer http://www.tv.cbc.ca/national/pgminfo/trans/T971202.htm

 3) CBC Coverage of Latimer http://www.tv.cbc.ca/national/pgminfo/trans/T971203.html

    The third item accessible at the URLs shown above shows the following:

    Title: Moving day for Robert Latimer.

    PETER MANSBRIDGE: This was moving day for Robert Latimer. He was transferred to his new home at a provincial jail in Saskatoon.  Latimer's been in custody in an RCMP holding cell since Monday.  That's when he was given that unprecedented sentence of two years less a day -- one year in a provincial jail, and one year confined to his farm for the second-degree murder of his disabled daughter Tracy.  No decision yet on whether the sentence will be appealed.

Again Peter Mansbridge was either deliberately or blissfully ignorant of the fact that Danielle Blais' case was a precedent that existed, contrary to what he stated.  I'm sure that just a few minutes of consultation with a lawyer would have provided a large number of similar cases from which it could have been determined what a normal sentence in a case like Robert Latimer's would have been.  Even the archives of the CBC would have provided a wealth of information.  Just to mention a few cases amongst many about which the CBC had provided liberal coverage.

  • There was the Drummond case, in which a baby boy, just hours from being born, was shot in the head while he was he was still in the mother's womb.  The mother claimed that she had wanted to commit suicide and that's why she shot herself (into the vagina) received a suspended sentence of six months.  That was to teach other parents a lesson, so the prosecutor said.  The boy, with a bullet lodged in his brain, is living with his father.

  • Mary Jane Forgarty of Halifax was given a suspended sentence in December 1995 in assisting her best friend to death. Forgarty gave the victim an insulin overdose in 1994; she was not a physician.

  • Dr. Maurice Genereux, sentenced to jail but is free until his appeal is settled. Genereux, admitted prescribing lethal doses of a barbiturate to two healthy but depressed men with HIV infection, and was sentenced to two years less a day, followed by three years on probation.

  • Two-year-old  Jacqueline Brewer’s parents allowed her to starve to death in her bedroom.  The judge expressed disgust for the parents, who were convicted of manslaughter.  Was the death of Jaqueline Brewer more merciful than that of Tracy Latimer? The parents of Jacqueline Brewer will remain in jail for close to four years.

  • Ten-year-old Katie Lynn Baker's mother ignored orders from a social worker to take the child to the hospital and the little girl starved to death.  Although Katie Lynn's death has been ruled a homicide, it appears that the mother hasn't been charged yet with her daughter's death.  I suppose that Katie Lynn's death too must have been more merciful than that of Tracy Latimer.  Of course what may play a role in the lack of prosecution is that just as in the Brewer case, social workers were fully well aware of what was being done in the case.  Katie Lynn's mother Cheryl McLean indicated at the inquest that she was honoring her daughter's wish to starve her to death.

  • Dr. Nancy Morrison of Halifax, Nova Scotia was charged with the first degree murder of one of her patients, in what was called assisted suicide.  She is free now without having served any time in prison and was allowed to practice her profession once more, even before her case came to trial.  As of Nov 19, 1998, her case was once more dismissed.

  • In 1992, in Edmonton three youths were sentenced only to probation and community service for beating 24-year-old Paul Deveraux to death. The judge explained the light sentence by saying the boys had not committed a "serious" attack.  If I remember right, the murderers are Natives.

A final comment is in order, to point out another difference in the two cases.  Danielle Blaise had a Legal Aid lawyer who defended her.  Robert Latimer's family has to pay for all legal costs that accrued through the use of his lawyer.  But, most important of all, in neither report is any sympathy expressed for the children, the true victims of the crimes.  Let's hope that neither child felt any pain while it was being murdered.

The difference in the two transcripts, the one about Blaise, and the other about Latimer, makes it quite clear what is happening here.  In the case of Blaise, mild apprehension about the killing of a child and much sympathy for the poor mother who took less than six years to crack, a mother who ostensibly was dismayed about the lack of compassion that the teachers had for the condition of her son and the fact that she had trouble obtaining baby-sitters.  On the other hand, in the Latimer case, a considerable show of forceful opinions that what he did was wrong and that the law had been bent to let him get off with a light sentence, a sentence that was already considerably more severe than that which Danielle Blaise received.

Anyone who feels that judges can't possibly be swayed by public opinion (although what goes for public opinion these days is virtually always nothing other than media hype) must consider that judges do watch TV, listen to the radio, and read the papers.  The trends exhibited in the media, even if there would have been an equal amount of coverage of the two cases, would most definitely have an impact on the opinion of any judge.  After all, they are politicians.  That is because of the bias in compassion, the trend to make women perpetrators out to be the real victims that cracked because they were helpless and to make men into brutes who should have known better and deserve the worst.  However, what reinforces the bias enormously to be hopelessly tilted against men and far more in favour of women when crimes of identical severity are committed is not only the degree of the bias but the quantity of it.

As it is beyond my means to make a full analysis of all the media coverage, I made a search of the Internet, using two comparable search strings.  A search for:

  • <+"Danielle Blaise" +Charles> (excluding the chevrons) returned 13 URLs
  • <+"Robert Latimer" +Tracy> (excluding the chevrons) returned 261 URLs
  • <+"The National Online" +"Danielle Blaise"> (excluding the chevrons) returned 1 URL
  • <+"The National Online" +"Robert Latimer"> (excluding the chevrons) returned 2 URLs

That causes insurmountable odds against Robert Latimer to receive equitable justice.  "Equitable" means under the circumstances no more than "what is good for the goose is good for the gander," that is, what was meted out to Danielle Blaise and any other women in such circumstances should have been meted out to Robert Latimer to a similar degree and extent, although I feel that what was given to Danielle Blaise was a sentence that was far too light.  However, it should be clear to anyone who labours under the illusion that justice can be had in the courts, that "justice in the courts" is little more than a tally of what shows up in the media, with a bit of rationalizing by the judge thrown in for good measure, explaining why he deviated from common sense and often from the law when he handed down his sentence.

It still remains to be explained why Robert Latimer was charged with murder and Danielle Blais and other women like her with manslaughter, or, even more incredibly, with infanticide, a crime category that is only available to women and no-one else.

While the case of Danielle Blaise is most unlikely to be revived, the case of Robert Latimer and his family hasn't ended yet.  Just a few days ago he was sentenced to 25 years of imprisonment with no chance for parole for ten years.  He plans to appeal his sentence in the Supreme Court of Canada.  What needs to be recognized is that a number of women who had been serving serious time in federal prison for capital murder have recently been pardoned.  I can't provide the details of their cases.  That is because their names are being kept secret "to protect their identities."   That is the final insult in the inequitable treatment that Canadian men receive at the hands of Canadian "justice".  If they are pardoned, their names are never kept secret, because men, no matter what they did to serve time in a correctional institution, need to be vilified.  It seems that Canadian "justice for men" works under the premise that neither men nor their identities require protection.

The URLs shown below provide additional opinions about the Danielle Blaise case.  They were found by doing a search on AltaVista using <+"Blaise" +bathtub> (excluding the chevrons).  A total of twenty were returned, but not all were pertinent or sufficiently detailed.  These are worthwhile looking at.  (Search for "Blaise" when you access them)

See also:

  • DVStats.org a search engine, aggregating research that examines the impact and extent of domestic violence upon male victims. (Off-site)

    This search facility equates domestic violence to intimate partner violence between men and women in relationships.  It does not provide information on violence between homosexuals, siblings or violence against family members other than heterosexual partners and spouses, such as infanticide, child abuse or violence against elderly in families.

    The primary purpose of the site is to shift public perceptions of such violence away from political ideology, and instead toward objectively verifiable scientific research.
  • Feminism For Male College Students A Short Guide to the Truth, by Angry Harry (Off-Site)

1999 10 10 (to provide slight edits of grammar and wording)
2001 01 29 (format changes)

2001 04 23 (added epilogue)