A bit shocking - Canadian Forces base commander charged

[Papa_Complex]

This is the sort of thing that I hate to hear about, because it's just a no win situation anyway that you look at it. COLONEL Russell Williams is the base commander at CFB Trenton, in Trenton, Ontario, Canada.

From the Ontario Provincial Police website:

BELLEVILLE, ON, Feb. 8 /CNW/ - On Sunday, February 7, 2010, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) and the Belleville Police arrested 46-year-old Russell Williams, of Tweed, Ontario for the disappearance and death of 27-year-old Jessica Lloyd who was last seen on January 28, 2010.

As a result of information sharing, the Belleville Police Service and the OPP began reviewing other serious incidents in the vicinity of the City of Belleville. Due to similarities in those incidents, the police investigative team linked this case to other crimes.

Williams came to the attention of the police as a result of information gathered during a road side canvass on Highway 37 on the night of February 4, 2010. On Sunday, February 7, 2010 Williams was arrested in Ottawa.

As a result of the intense joint police investigation, Williams is charged with:

1. 1st degree murder of Jessica Lloyd,
2. 1st degree murder of Marie Comeau
3. 2 counts of forcible confinement and
4. 2 counts of Break and enter and sexual assault

Marie France Comeau was found murdered in her Brighton residence on November 25, 2009. Comeau was a Corporal with 437 Squadron at Canadian Forces Base Trenton, Ontario.

In September of 2009 there were two separate home invasions, in the Tweed area in which two women were the victims of sexual assault.

The body of Jessica Lloyd was located this morning off Carry Road, in the Municipality of Tweed. The post mortem is being scheduled at the Coroner's Office, Toronto.

The joint investigative team would like to thank the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service their assistance and cooperation.

The Belleville Police Service and the OPP are continuing to work together. If anyone has information, they are asked to call the OPP, Belleville Police or Crimestoppers.

For further information: Ontario Provincial Police, Sgt. Kristine Rae, (613) 267-2626; Belleville Police Service, Sgt. Julie Forestell, (613) 966-0882

[CrazyKell]

:( Sicko.

[Kaneman]

Are you guys able to mount a defense against home invasions?

[CrazyKell]

What do you mean Kaneman?

Obviously our gun laws are different up here. But other than that, I would think physical force is an option. But he sounds like a sicko who had it planned and it might not have mattered. :(

[Papa_Complex]

Are you guys able to mount a defense against home invasions?

Implied duty to retreat. Not that it matters when a 40-something year old trained soldier surprises a woman in her bed at night.

[Kaneman]

What do you mean Kaneman?

Obviously our gun laws are different up here. But other than that, I would think physical force is an option. But he sounds like a sicko who had it planned and it might not have mattered. :(

I was just wondering how hard it is to actually own a gun/ammo that allows you the option to not get raped and murdered by someone much stronger than you.

Kell, remember the dog debate?.... This is why dogs are great. Even if my dogs don't kill the intruder they give me enough warning to get ready.

[Kaneman]

Implied duty to retreat. Not that it matters when a 40-something year old trained soldier surprises a woman in her bed at night.

What is that, like you have to go to the farthest room in your house from the intruder and wait for him to breach that room before you kill him?

[Papa_Complex]

What is that, like you have to go to the farthest room in your house from the intruder and wait for him to breach that room before you kill him?

As in many places in the US if you can withdraw without combat, then you must do so. This is not explicitly stated in our Criminal Code, but is implicit.

[Kaneman]

As in many places in the US if you can withdraw without combat, then you must do so. This is not explicitly stated in our Criminal Code, but is implicit.

Ok, yea, I've heard of that. Obviously we don't have that in Texas, and I think most other states are repealing that as well.

Retreat in your own house....the thought of it blows my mind.

[Papa_Complex]

Ok, yea, I've heard of that. Obviously we don't have that in Texas, and I think most other states are repealing that as well.

Retreat in your own house....the thought of it blows my mind.

Let's just say that if someone broke into my house with intent to harm, police would likely find that it was so he could commit suicide with my .44 lever.

[Apoc]

You dont have to retreat in your own home, not as it sounds anyway. If someone intends to do seriously bodily harm, you CAN kill them in self defence.


But, shoot someone, say robbing your home, who doesnt have a weapon/isnt trying to harm you, and your going away for a while.

[Papa_Complex]

The Supreme Court of Canada would beg to differ.

[karl_1052]

You dont have to retreat in your own home, not as it sounds anyway. If someone intends to do seriously bodily harm, you CAN kill them in self defence.


But, shoot someone, say robbing your home, who doesnt have a weapon/isnt trying to harm you, and your going away for a while.

Your wrongage could get you raped in prison.

Criminal Code, Sections 34-37

34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.

(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

35. Every one who has without justification assaulted another but did not commence the assault with intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm, or has without justification provoked an assault on himself by another, may justify the use of force subsequent to the assault if
(a) he uses the force
(i) under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence of the person whom he has assaulted or provoked, and
(ii) in the belief, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary in order to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm;
( b) he did not, at any time before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose, endeavour to cause death or grievous bodily harm; and
(c) he declined further conflict and quitted or retreated from it as far as it was feasible to do so before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose.

36. Provocation includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures.

37. (1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to justify the wilful infliction of any hurt or mischief that is excessive, having regard to the nature of the assault that the force used was intended to prevent.

[goof2]

Some states have a requirement that a victim's response be proportional to the threat against them. I figure if someone breaks in to my house they have forfeit that expectation. Fortunately the state where I live has some sense and agrees with me.

[Dave]

What is that, like you have to go to the farthest room in your house from the intruder and wait for him to breach that room before you kill him?

jersey is like that. Doesnt mean i wont clear my house if something feels hinky.

[Kaneman]

Those laws are insane.

[Fleck750]

Those laws are insane.

Sounds like they're French based to me. Retreat, post a white flag on the door of the farthest room. :cool:

[Papa_Complex]

Sounds like they're French based to me. Retreat, post a white flag on the door of the farthest room. :cool:

Sure, if the French were the sort to get backed into a corner and then fight light rabid wolverines (35.c).

[Apoc]

Your wrongage could get you raped in prison.

Criminal Code, Sections 34-37

34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself.

(2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if
(a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and
(b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.

35. Every one who has without justification assaulted another but did not commence the assault with intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm, or has without justification provoked an assault on himself by another, may justify the use of force subsequent to the assault if
(a) he uses the force
(i) under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence of the person whom he has assaulted or provoked, and
(ii) in the belief, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary in order to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm;
( b) he did not, at any time before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose, endeavour to cause death or grievous bodily harm; and
(c) he declined further conflict and quitted or retreated from it as far as it was feasible to do so before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose.

36. Provocation includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures.

37. (1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it.
(2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to justify the wilful infliction of any hurt or mischief that is excessive, having regard to the nature of the assault that the force used was intended to prevent.

All it says there, is use reasonable force. Someone comes in your home with a gun, attemptint to kill/harm you, you have every right to shoot them, and it will be ruled self defense. Its not as strict as you guys are making out. I dont need to wait for someone to shoot me in my home, before I can fire back.

Its not like this country jails people for defending themselves, they just dont allow the use of excessive force. Meaning you cant shoot someone for punching you in the face. But you can shoot them to prevent them from shooting you, in your own home.

[Papa_Complex]

All it says there, is use reasonable force. Someone comes in your home with a gun, attemptint to kill/harm you, you have every right to shoot them, and it will be ruled self defense. Its not as strict as you guys are making out. I dont need to wait for someone to shoot me in my home, before I can fire back.

Its not like this country jails people for defending themselves, they just dont allow the use of excessive force. Meaning you cant shoot someone for punching you in the face. But you can shoot them to prevent them from shooting you, in your own home.

And in many American States you can shoot someone for stepping into your home. In Canada you first have to try and make it out the back door. I'm trying to put it in perspective.

[Kaneman]

Sounds like they're French based to me. Retreat, post a white flag on the door of the farthest room. :cool:

From Cracked.com:

Where We've Seen It:

The image of the "cowardly Frenchman" has appeared in virtually every media possible, from movies to children's shows and video games, right down to the personal sentiments of Captain America (and he wouldn't lie to you; dishonesty makes Captain America vomit in rage).

Why it's All Bullshit:

Ask Rudyard Kipling, who once famously said about the French: "Their business is war, and they do their business." And boy howdy, a quick glance at France's history shows business is booming:

Since 387 BC, France has fought 168 major wars against such badasses as the Roman Empire, the British Army and the Turkish forces. Their track record isn't too shabby, either: They've won 109, lost 49 and drawn (or as close as you can "draw" a war) 10 times. Professional boxers have been crowned world champions on shittier records than that.

And while it is true that France surrendered to Germany relatively early in WWII, that was only because they hadn't picked themselves up after WWI yet. And WWI (despite being an entire "I" lower) wasn't exactly an anemic playground chickenfight--the French suffered about 5.7 million casualties (the war killed or wounded an incredible 37 million people worldwide).

So yes, the next time around they let the Germans take over officially, but they never actually stopped fighting: the French resistance was one of the most enduring symbols of Nazi opposition in Europe. The resistance was the originator of the archetypal trench coat wearing merchants of bloody death you see in countless action movies and video games today. They blew up bridges, staged daring night raids, slit German throats while generally looking fantastic (if a little ennui-stricken) while doing it.

And not a damn thing's changed since then: France is the most underestimated military force in the world, with the third highest military spending on the planet and an estimated 300 nuclear warheads at their disposal. So basically... we might want to knock off the "coward" talk now, lest we find the impeccably-styled death squads smoking their thin cigarettes on our doorstep.

[Kaneman]

And in many American States you can shoot someone for stepping into your home. In Canada you first have to try and make it out the back door. I'm trying to put it in perspective.

In Texas you are legally authorized to use deadly force on someone committing criminal mischief at night....so yea, the law says you can kill those dirty toilet paperers.

Probably more productive just to make them clean your yard at gun point while you smoke a giant cigar.

[Apoc]

And in many American States you can shoot someone for stepping into your home. In Canada you first have to try and make it out the back door. I'm trying to put it in perspective.

Oh, agreed. Its not texas, you cant just riddle someone with bulletholes for being on your property.

I was just pointing out that you can defend yourself, and people, especially our own citizens, shouldnt think otherwise.

[goof2]

Probably more productive just to make them clean your yard at gun point while you smoke a giant cigar.

Someone had to do it.

[sherri_chickie]

We've got a hand gun in our house. And a baseball bat beside the bed.. You can have guns in Canada, it's just a little more regulated. I can't tell you how many farmers I know have rifles that are not registered anymore ( they all have permits to get the gun, but have not registered them with the new gun registry ( waste of $$))

[Kaneman]

Oh, agreed. Its not texas, you cant just riddle someone with bulletholes for being on your property.

I was just pointing out that you can defend yourself, and people, especially our own citizens, shouldnt think otherwise.

What is interesting though, is that despite our lax laws allowing us to go on killing rampages in our own neighborhood lawns....we do not have a problem with it.

Every once and a while a story will hit the news, but by and large our laws do what they are intended to do, allow people to defend themselves from thieving and raping scumbags.

Texas is known for it's lax gun laws and thus the base of a lot of jokes that eventually become fixed in people's minds as fact...but it is rare for an innocent person to be killed by someone with self defense weapons.

[Papa_Complex]

What is interesting though, is that despite our lax laws allowing us to go on killing rampages in our own neighborhood lawns....we do not have a problem with it.

Every once and a while a story will hit the news, but by and large our laws do what they are intended to do, allow people to defend themselves from thieving and raping scumbags.

Texas is known for it's lax gun laws and thus the base of a lot of jokes that eventually become fixed in people's minds as fact...but it is rare for an innocent person to be killed by someone with self defense weapons.

What is also interesting is that in a city that's larger than all but a few in the US, we freak out when there are less than 1/10th the number of gunshot murders per capita when compared to any equal-sized US city. We don't apparently have a problem with rampaging bands of looters, despite not having the "right to keep and bear arms."

You get the society that you prepare for. Prophecy: Self fulfilled.

[Kaneman]

What is also interesting is that in a city that's larger than all but a few in the US, we freak out when there are less than 1/10th the number of gunshot murders per capita when compared to any equal-sized US city. We don't apparently have a problem with rampaging bands of looters, despite not having the "right to keep and bear arms."

You get the society that you prepare for. Prophecy: Self fulfilled.

Yea well....you try bordering Mexico sometime. :lol:

[101lifts2]

And in many American States you can shoot someone for stepping into your home. In Canada you first have to try and make it out the back door. I'm trying to put it in perspective.

Even if it's the dead of winter and -40C outside? :lol I would think you can shoot em then. There has to be a temperature threshold in that law somewhere. lol

In California, not only are you prohibited from shooting the guy, but you must help him carry the shit he jacked from you to his car if it's too heavy.

[101lifts2]

Yea well....you try bordering Mexico sometime. :lol:


Exactly...

[Papa_Complex]

Yea well....you try bordering Mexico sometime. :lol:

Yeah, that really explains Omaha, Nebraska :lol:

Big hint: Don't move to St. Louis.

[Kaneman]

Yeah, that really explains Omaha, Nebraska :lol:

Big hint: Don't move to St. Louis.

Meh. I've heard the same point you're making over and over again throughout my years of promoting the possession of weapons able to deal death from a distance and my response is always the same:

This is the World I was born in to, I can't change it, but I can sure respond to it.

BTW, I was 17 years old and driving a "flashy" Dodge Neon Sport with bright yellow racing stripes, rims and a beautiful stereo system. My two best friends and I drove to the St. Louis area to hang out with his family. I decided I was going to go see a girl I met in a bar, and promptly got lost alone in East St. Louis. I remember stopping at a barred up gas station to ask "how the fuck do I get out of here" and the clerk goes, "You ain't supposed to be here." Scary shit, but I was well armed.

P.S. Technically Nebraska and Illinois border Mexico too as part of the U.S., where Mexicans have spread throughout the entire country. However, this has much less to do with me carrying a firearm than the ever present threat of the an invasion by the King of England.