|
Decorated air force colonel, Russell Williams = super freak (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| FunkyCrew |
| wait, I thought it was NO parol after 25 years? |
|
|
| 1dawoman |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
i wonder if his wife had anything to do with this |
Well after realizing he was caught during his confession, Williams' expressed concern only for the impact that his actions would have on his wife.....so I'm guessing she did not have anything to do with this.
Also, psych experts are now stating that his underwear cross dressing fetish could indicate homosexual tendencies he fought to suppress...
bet he didn't want his wife knowing that either.... |
|
|
| kotsy |
| quote: | Originally posted by FunkyCrew
wait, I thought it was NO parol after 25 years? |
no chance of parole for 25 years then he's eligible |
|
|
| I_Am_Vince |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shaya007
They should split the pension and give it to the family of the victims.. |
Why? He worked for that pension. As much as I don't like him it's just not right. When you work a portion of your wage goes into the pension plan, along with money that the employer put in too. In the military you have to work for 20 years to get a pension, so he's deserved it. He worked for that pension so him and his wife can live off the money when he's retired. So far his wife wasn't involved with any of this, why should she be stripped of money that her husband earned? |
|
|
| Skipper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
i wonder if his wife had anything to do with this |
I don't think anyone has speculated that.
Imagine the wtf she is going through. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
I don't think anyone has speculated that.
Imagine the wtf she is going through. |
You would suspect that his sexual deviancy may somehow tie in with his sexual life partner. Maybe she was some big fat bitch who dominated him into submission, and this was his vent? Who knows. I think its pretty obvious with Paul Bernardo that it was Hamolka that coaxed him into the killings, and perhaps even committed some of them (definitely her sister).
I guess the police would have troffed through that probability already and didnt find a link. Who knows, im just saying its kind of sketchy that she is entirely out of the picture. |
|
|
| TO guy |
| quote: | Originally posted by I_Am_Vince
Why? He worked for that pension. As much as I don't like him it's just not right. When you work a portion of your wage goes into the pension plan, along with money that the employer put in too. In the military you have to work for 20 years to get a pension, so he's deserved it. He worked for that pension so him and his wife can live off the money when he's retired. So far his wife wasn't involved with any of this, why should she be stripped of money that her husband earned? |
Agreed. The fact that it's a public pension is the part that makes me want to strip it from him. But you're right, he did work for that pension, and it is his money.
The government is trying to get it back. I think that's all just bull posturing, getting headlines, etc. The courts will find this unconstitutional no doubt. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shaya007
They should split the pension and give it to the family of the victims.. |
I disagree, as regardless of one's crimes he earned the pension. Now, what should happen is the victims families sue for wrongful death, a restitution order be awarded by the court, the family receive payments from the pension in assignment. This would be the correct legal recourse... you can't just willy-nilly take property away from someone and give it to someone else when it had no involvement with the crime. Proper legal chanels exist. |
|
|
| Jay Leno |
| quote: | Originally posted by I_Am_Vince
Why? He worked for that pension. As much as I don't like him it's just not right. When you work a portion of your wage goes into the pension plan, along with money that the employer put in too. In the military you have to work for 20 years to get a pension, so he's deserved it. He worked for that pension so him and his wife can live off the money when he's retired. So far his wife wasn't involved with any of this, why should she be stripped of money that her husband earned? |
Great post. I totally agree. |
|
|
| cammaxwell |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
I disagree, as regardless of one's crimes he earned the pension. Now, what should happen is the victims families sue for wrongful death, a restitution order be awarded by the court, the family receive payments from the pension in assignment. This would be the correct legal recourse... you can't just willy-nilly take property away from someone and give it to someone else when it had no involvement with the crime. Proper legal chanels exist. |
They are going after the pension but they're doing it through a civil law suit. The families of the victims are looking at launching a civil law suit, similar to what they did to OJ Simpson in the nineties. So if they win that, they can then go after his finances which would include his pension.
They wouldn't have a right to just "take" away his pension. As you said he worked for that and that would be wrong. But this way if he "owes" the money they can get it.
Now I wonder if his wife works and supports herself? Would be trerrible if she was also relying on that money to survive when she retired and then had it taken away. |
|
|
| StereoPrincess |
| quote: | Originally posted by cammaxwell
They are going after the pension but they're doing it through a civil law suit. The families of the victims are looking at launching a civil law suit, similar to what they did to OJ Simpson in the nineties. So if they win that, they can then go after his finances which would include his pension.
They wouldn't have a right to just "take" away his pension. As you said he worked for that and that would be wrong. But this way if he "owes" the money they can get it.
Now I wonder if his wife works and supports herself? Would be trerrible if she was also relying on that money to survive when she retired and then had it taken away. |
him and his wife split assets early on so that her money could be protected. |
|
|
| cammaxwell |
| quote: | Originally posted by nacarter
Despite comments from the judge and in the papers, Russell Williams is not a serial killer. He's a serial offender yes, but to be classified a serial killer, you need at least three murders. Williams isn't even seriously considered a suspect in anything other than what he confessed to. |
I think the definition is two or more murders, as long as the murders are committed separately, OR three murders over a short period of time and that that the murders were done for personal gratification.
Did Bernardo only kill two girls? He is considered a serial killer isn't he? |
|
|
|
|
