When bureaucrats thought sexual "needs" are a "right", a vulnerable woman wound up dead

  • Thread starter Thread starter ATraveller
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

ATraveller

Guest
This is a horrific story. Why this isn’t national news in Canada is shocking though not unsurprising.
It is unbelievable that men who have killed their intimate partners would not only be allowed, but encouraged, to go to brothels while they are on parole and out on day passes.

But that’s exactly what Canada’s parole board agreed to last September
He had sexual needs, his caseworker told the [parole] board. But because Gallese wasn’t deemed ready to have relationships with a woman, buying sexual services was the solution to satisfying his “sexual needs.”
The Parole Board of Canada did not respond to questions before this column’s deadline.
[H]ow did the institutions and the culture at both Corrections Canada and the parole board […] fail so spectacularly?
I’ll answer that one. Their crazy unscientific views on sex and “modern norms and values” led to the death of a vulnerable woman.

 
Last edited:
That is shocking. I cannot believe this was seen as an acceptable idea.

I am just speechless.
 
Is visiting a massage parlor or brother illegal in Canada? If so, how can it be that an organ of the criminal justice system (the Parole Board) explicitly endorses such a proposal?

Do we have all the facts??
 
All women (and those who love them), should boycott travel to Canada, the way people boycott travel to certain American states.
 
Appalling that something like this would be approved. The results of bleeding-hearts with no ability to think rationally.

"…the decision in Gallese’s case reflects some deeply disturbing notions.

The first is that men — even violent criminals — have a right to satiate their sexual appetites with another person.

The second is the perverse idea that if a violent man is incapable or not ready to form a healthy relationship with another person, it’s OK for him to engage in unhealthy relationships where, as the buyer, he has power over the seller.

Finally, putting the sexual needs of a violent criminal ahead of the safety of other Canadians, including those who do sex work, suggests a grotesque hierarchy that is an affront to the constitutional and moral ideals of equality."
 
This is indeed shocking. The paragraphs that I found most perplexing, however, were these:
It went on to say: “The hearing allowed us to realize you managed, and this with the approval of your case-management team, relations with women that the board considers inappropriate.”

It was a strategy, the board noted, that “paradoxically constitutes a worrying and significant risk factor.” It ordered a re-examination of the terms in six months.
If I understand this correctly, it seems that the case-management team approved Gallese’s use of sex workers, but that the parole board itself considered this to be “inappropriate”. However, the parole board appears to have authorized his continuing to use sex workers for a trial period of six months, despite its assertion that this was “inappropriate” and “a worrying and significant risk factor”. Surely the case-management team works under the authority of the parole board, and surely if the parole board considers something to be “inappropriate” and “a worrying and significant risk factor” it simply should not happen.

On any view, this horrible series of events was allowed to proceed for the worst possible reasons and with the worst imaginable consequences.
All women (and those who love them), should boycott travel to Canada, the way people boycott travel to certain American states.
Does that not seem a somewhat disproportionate response?

Would you suggest that people should boycott all travel to France, Poland, and Switzerland, because these countries have refused to extradite Roman Polański to the United States, where he is regarded as a fugitive from justice in connection with raping a 13-year-old girl?

Would you recommend that people boycott all travel the UK because of the Metropolitan Police’s refusal to investigate an allegation that Prince Andrew had sex with an underage girl forced into prostitution by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell on the patently false basis that the case lies primarily within the jurisdiction of the US, despite the fact that the alleged offence took place in London?

Would you urge people to boycott all travel to Cyprus following the shocking series events which led to a 19-year-old migrant working being jailed after she was gang-raped by a dozen tourists? The doctor who examined the victim was in no doubt as the to truth of her allegations, and the police investigation clearly fell far short of the standards required by Cypriot and EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights. The real perpetrators, meanwhile, are now far from the reach of Cypriot justice.
 
Well, this incident plus legalized assisted suicide.
Do you also suggest that people boycott travel to the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Germany, Colombia, Victoria, Australia, nine US states, and the District of Columbia?

Do you favor boycotting countries for other reasons, e.g. Russia for the annexation of Crimea and the government’s policy of assassinating political opponents both within and outside of Russia?
 
He had sexual needs, his caseworker told the board. But because Gallese wasn’t deemed ready to have relationships with a woman, buying sexual services was the solution to satisfying his “sexual needs.”
Good grief. As much as we may be loathe to admit it, he’s a human being, not a barnyard animal in heat.

And those women’s needs to be safe from a known perpetrator? Apparently those mean squat. 😠

Would any Canadians care to chime in here? (Let me know whom to tag). I’m wondering if sex work is illegal there but gets treated with winks and nudges.
 
The Parole Board of Canada did not respond to questions before this column’s deadline.
Quebec is the responsible jurisdiction so I don’t get why the newspaper (Vancouver Sun) is putting questions to the Parole Board of Canada. Quebec and Ontario are the only provinces that have their own parol board.

Edit: the federal Correctional Service Agency and the Parol Board of Canada will jointly conduct an investigation “into all of the circumstances that led to the tragic death of M. Levesque,” Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said on Monday. (Jan 27)
 
Last edited:
Consensual sexual relations between adults are not criminalized in Canada on the basis of money being exchanged as they are in most parts of the USA.
 
Last edited:
Consensual sexual relations between adults are not criminalized in Canada on the basis of money being exchanged as they are in most parts of the USA.
Actually the Canadian law was changed in 2014 to de facto criminalize most sex work acts. The prosecution primarily falls on the person (usually man) soliciting the services rather than the worker offering them. There are a few loopholes but in practice it’s hard for people to engage in or partake of sex work without breaking any law.
 
Quebec and Ontario are the only provinces that have their own parol board.
I didn’t know that. I always assumed criminal matters were a federal matter.
However, I found this from Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have a citation but it sounds real.
Under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act , which governs federal corrections, provinces and territories may establish their own parole boards for offenders sentenced to a term of incarceration of less than two years. Only two provinces now have their own parole boards: Ontario and Quebec
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top