Calgary court ruling on mom who dumped her babies means open season on unwanted infants

Article here. Well-know Canadian journalist Barbara Kay's scathing criticism is aimed at Calgary Judge Peter McIntyre, who did not take the Crown prosecution's advice of 12 years and instead awarded only 18 months for murdering her two newborn children and attempting to murder a third. Excerpt:

'Cultural observer Joseph Epstein wrote a wonderful satirical column in the Wall Street Journal a few weeks about the “Good Intentions Paving Company,” a riff on the old cliché, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

The Good Intentions Paving Company does not confine its activities to the U.S. In fact, it had one of its representatives in Calgary this week, Judge Peter McIntyre, handing a sentence of 18 months in prison and three years’ probation to Meredith Borowiec, who admitted to throwing three newborn babies, successively over several years, into dumpsters immediately after birth. (Two died, the third was rescued alive).

“This is a terrible case,” Judge McIntyre told Borowiec. “You’ve shocked the community and you’ve shamed yourself. I have to remind myself to be dispassionate about this case.” The judge then proceeded to be anything but dispassionate – dispassion would have had him accepting the prosecution’s demand for at least eight more years in prison on top of 18 months served in custody – as he reflexively adopted a compassionate default attitude to Borowiec’s case that should have been jettisoned decades ago.
...
But the judge bought Borowiec’s story. He said: “All three offences were committed while your mind was disturbed while giving birth.” If this decision stands, it’s open season on unwanted infants. Let’s hope this precedent is overturned on appeal by a court that doesn’t set its moral compass according to the Good Intentions Paving Company handbook.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

wow! judge hands out 18 mos. sentence for woman killing live babies, and rails against the defendant? yeah. o canada. guy here recently got 26 years (1st offense) for touching a child in an inappropriate manner, w/o and physical proof.

I remember (90's?) when canadian courts held that woman on woman (outside marriage) sex was not considered adultery in a divorce. its just when men are involved in adultery that the fund$ (court award$) are to be directed to women.

and law schools just keep churning these nitwits out.

Like0 Dislike0