A Bizarre Defense for Murder

Last weekend in Ottawa a bizarre murder case concluded with two men found guilty of capital murder, and one for non-capital murder, of two young children.

Most eye catching was the defense's argument for a lesser charge, not least being that the accused had killed the wrong "target(s)"-- ergo, the murders were not premeditated. Call the children's deaths "collateral damage."

The facts of the case, described in confessions: a lowlife, sometime minor police informant was accused around the neighborhood of having molested the son of a local single mother. His street rep besmirched, this character recruited a couple of buddies to deal with the mother.

Burning down the house with her in it was the plan they came up with, of course assuring each other, without firm foreknowledge, that the children wouldn't be at home. They torched the home with gasoline bombs. The mother escaped the inferno. The children died.

Atrocities like this one certainly provide grist for the pro-capital punishment mill. First is the crime itself. Then there's the gall to present such a defense, even when Canada's criminal code is clear that murder committed during the commission of another crime is capital murder. Fortunately, to the extent possible, the court found correctly

Of course, the three will serve their sentences segregated from other inmates. General prison populations take a dim view of suspected pedophiles, self-confessed police informants, and child murderers. "Gee, it was all a mistake, and I'm really sorry!" doesn't cut it inside prison walls.

Criminals certainly aren't alone in behaving bizarrely. Recently in the U.S., an execution was postponed because the convicted killer had gone insane. The court ordered medical treatment to restore enough sanity to insure the convict understood why he was being executed. Bully for humane treatment!