The Groene Case Points Up The Weakness Of The Courts In Dealing With Sexual Predators
The cases of Shasta Groene, 8, and her brother, Dylan, 9, of Coeur D'Alene, Idaho, point up both the growing obsession of the 24-hour cable networks with sexual predator matters, and the weaknesses of the American and Canadian justice systems in dealing with known offenders.
The courts can and increasingly do imprison U.S. journalists for trying to keep the identities of their confidential sources secret, but they are much too quick to order the release from prison of such predators as Joseph Edward Duncan, III, 42, of Fargo, N.D., or Karla Homulka, 35, in Canada.
Six weeks after the murder of her mother and two others, Shasta Groene was found in the company of Duncan, a known predator who has served ten years in prison for other sex offenses, and even has established a blog telling the world how an alternate personality forces him to do bad things. Law enforcement authorities now are examining remains found in Montana of what may be Dylan Groene.
Meanwhile, in Montreal, Homulka, an accomplice in the murders of her 15-year-old sister and two others girls, at the hands of a rapist, has been released after 12 years in prison. Homulka held a drug-soaked cloth over the face of her sister while the rapist did the deed that killed her, and continues to avoid an apology in any of the three rape-murders she helped commit.
Excuse me folks, but I believe neither Duncan nor Homulka should ever have been released, and now that he is captured in the Groene crimes, Duncan should be questioned rigorously and compellingly, perhaps even tortured, until he tells the whole truth about them and then should, as speedily as possible, be executed.
Why is society so indulgent toward such people? What rights should they have to rape young women, murder people or kidnap their children? And why should they ever be released to endanger others?
It is "do-gooding" civil liberties groups that all too often argue against quick, decisive action against the obviously guilty. These organizations have something to do with the wave of brutal murders society is confronted with. And the cable networks give prurient over-publicity to the crimes that may encourage others.
They allow monsters like Homulka to go on an interview show in Canada, as she did this morning, and refuse to so much as apologize for the crimes she helped commit. She had the gall to say this morning, "I am a very private person and I don't like to talk about my feelings." Why wasn't the interview halted at that point?
Let her rot in jail. And the parole authorities and judges who let her out should rot there with her.
The New York Times has occasionally gone back to judges who gave limited sentences to people who later committed horrible crimes, apparently like Duncan, and asked them whether they had second thoughts. These judges seldom have wished to talk about their sentences, but it is abundently clear they are unfit to serve on the bench.
We live at a time when a man implicated in the murders of Kurds and the imprisonment of American diplomatic hostages can be elected President of Iran in an election fixed by religious extremists.
We also live in a time when the Duncans and Homulkas can walk around free until they choose to give in once again to their "alternate personalities," and go out and rape and murder. We have only ourselves to blame for supporting cravenly weak legal and political systems that allow them to do it.