Robert Latimer granted day parole in late Feb 08

END OF FEB 08 - Robert Latimer’s trial for the murder of his 13 year old daughter Tracy Latimer in 1993 in Saskatchewan was one of the most difficult and indeed vexing criminal trials in latter day Canadian history. The helpless, completely invalid girl was murdered in an act defended by the father as mercy killing.

Well, there are no provisions in Canadian law, and few countries with such legal provisions, to deal with the act of ‘so-called’ mercy killing. He was convicted of second degree murder and served seven years of his mandatory 10 year sentence without parole. The parole board which earlier denied his first application for parole changed its decision and granted Latimer day parole. He will be heading to a halfway house in Ottawa where he requested the assignation in order to lobby for legislation related to Canada’s legal treatment of euthanasia.

The consensus in the defence of Robert Latimer is that he found himself at his wit's end seeking treatment for his catastrophically disabled daughter. She was born to a stunted life with cerebral palsy and many complications that locked her forever into a mental state of four months of age.

Latimer and family (wife and other three kids) had devoted all those years of hope and care to the upbringing of Tracy, even so, the situation continuously deteriorated along with the assistance to ameliorate problems. Somehow Robert Latimer decided it should last no longer. He has never recanted or changed his mind about this decision and this caused the parole board to first withhold parole.

In a curious way Tracy Latimer has received munificent attention and a shower of human concern under the spotless conditions of a Canadian courtroom being dead, being killed, far sooner than she ever would have received it staying alive, roiling in agony, languishing between a bathing, a feeding, a changing, a sleeping, and another life-saving surgery, followed by a touch and go recovery and day-in, day-out and a family living in servitude to the girl’s complete inability to function at any level except existence.

In a sense she challenged some people to ask how much are they contributing to life that they should continue to exist. In another sense, she existed only to scream unheard by any but the most select professionals in medical society, and closeted with family members, and no one else.

Ultimately Latimer had decided, apparently, devotion to Tracy was doing her more harm than good, and he must have reasoned that since resources were unavailable to make her life and the Latimer family anything more than complete servitude to her progressively worse existence, in contrast to a family working like a congruent and manageable affair, and no institution would end her descent into pain, she should perish.

Obviously that is a not a decision any person wants to make, and certainly one that is disallowed under the law. In other words, it was against the law to kill his severely disabled daughter even though keeping her alive seemed to Robert Latimer to be an act of abject cruelty. He chose the lesser of two evils and has stuck with his choice ever since.

For doing what he decided was absolutely necessary to end the suffering of Tracy Latimer her father is spending life in prison. He refuses to admit the error of his ways, a fundamental requirement of the system, for his refusal to admit the mistake to the parole board is all that prevents them from opening the door to Robert Latimer’s release.

The parole situation for Latimer may have changed with the late intercession of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, arguing, "The parole board acted improperly by rejecting parole." Latimer was denied parole in December 07, mainly because 'he showed no remorse for his actions.'

According to the BCCLA counsel Jason Gratl, "Jurors in both of Latimer's trials urged that Latimer be given parole." Gratl also noted the parole board's 'triggers' were not set off about concerns of rehabilitation, specific deterrence and protection. The only thing preventing his release is Latimer's inability to express remorse about the deed.

"Although it has a role at sentencing," Gratl wrote, "the objective of denunciation plays no part in the consideration of whether Mr. Latimer should be granted day parole."

It appears from all points of view, including that of psychologist Dr. Bruce Monkhouse, that Latimer is a very low risk, and, "had only an eight per cent statistical probability of reoffending within eight years and a 10 per cent probability in 10 years."

Indeed, the BCCLA indicates its concerns about why the parole board initially refused to release Latimer. "The panel that denied his parole was plainly more interested in extracting a tearful apology from Latimer than it was in performing its proper function."

Latimer’s appeal was going back to the parole board. If the board had denied the appeal the BCCLA would have taken it to the federal court.

A read 0f this Latimer-oriented website provides one side’s close examination of the subject of Tracy Latimer’s death and various aspects of euthanasia, a delicate subject world-wide and here in Canada, with strong advocates both for and against everywhere you turn.

The timeline on this website reads as follows, "October 24th 1993 and in 1994, Robert Latimer is found guilty of second-degree murder, a crime for which the mandatory sentence is life in prison with no chance of parole for 10 years. Latimer appeals but his conviction is upheld in 1995. Another trial takes place in 1997 because there had been jury tampering before the first trial."

The website informed how the legal struggle continued, "In December 1997, Judge Ted Noble recognizes Latimer's act as one of 'compassionate homicide' and grants him a constitutional exemption. In 1998, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal sets aside constitutional exemption and upholds the mandatory sentence." Latimer appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which upheld the life sentence. On January 18th 2001, Robert Latimer went to prison.

As a matter of fact, the Latimer situation regarding the killing of the daughter Tracy continues to appear before a Canadian and international audience because, "There is no mention in the Criminal Code of 'mercy killing', of 'compassionate homicide' or of 'euthanasia,'" said the authors of the Latimer dot.org site. Due to this, "Judges' hands are tied by imposed minimum mandatory sentences."

The split in society on this issue is easy to distinguish. One side argues in favour of revisiting the subject to clarify new rules to respect the need for actions like compassion and mercy in killing in Canada, saying that, in 1995, "a special Senate Committee on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide unanimously recommended that the punishment for murder be reduced in cases where there is the essential element of compassion or mercy."

The opposing side cites the same exact same committee in their favour, “The Canadian Senate Committee on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide in 1995 decided by a 5 - 2 vote that euthanasia should remain illegal in Canada,” adding, “In 2001 the Supreme Court of Canada decided unanimously that Robert Latimer should not receive a lesser sentence in the euthanasia death of his daughter Tracy. He is serving a minimum sentence of 10 years before parole for second degree murder.”

Other nations are struggling with euthanasia and a few have made laws to permit it, including Belgium and Holland, and Oregon in the USA. It should be interesting for Canadians to watch the progress Robert Latimer is able to make in the subject.