XPost: can.politics, tor.general, bc.politics   
   From: Panca@nyet.ca   
      
   Incredible.   So much for Harper's 'tough on crime' laws, eh?   
   ________________________________________   
   November 3, 2014 - Reuters / Macleans   
      
      
   Serial killer Russell Williams will keep his military pension—for now   
      
   Ontario’s highest court bars Laurie Massicotte from pursuing Williams’s   
   pension   
   as part of a multimillion-dollar lawsuit   
      
      
   Killer ex-colonel Russell Williams is going to keep his military pension—for   
   now, at least.   
      
   In a judgment released today, Ontario’s highest court ruled that Laurie   
   Massicotte—a Tweed, Ont., woman who was ambushed in her living room and   
   sexually assaulted just weeks before the disgraced air force officer committed   
   his first murder—should not be allowed to pursue Williams’s pension as   
   part of   
   a multi-million-dollar lawsuit she first filed in 2011.  Simply put, the Court   
   of Appeal ruled that any legal arguments about the serial predator’s   
   retirement   
   benefits are “premature” because Massicotte has yet to win her case or be   
   awarded damages.   
      
   If her lawsuit is ultimately successful—and Williams fails to pay the dollar   
   figure determined by a judge—then the pension could be back in play, the   
   court   
   concluded.   
      
   What should happen to Williams’s pension, believed be worth $60,000 a year,   
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^has been a   
   controversial question since the day he confessed to a sadistic crime spree   
   that shocked the country: two horrific murders, two home-invasion sexual   
   assaults, and dozens of fetish break-ins targeting female underwear.  Like most   
   pension plans, the one bound by the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act   
   specifically states that benefits are “exempt from attachment, seizure and   
   execution,” which means they can’t be revoked by the government or awarded   
   to   
   plaintiffs.  It doesn’t matter that the recipient is a serial predator who   
   violated every core value the military stands for; he contributed to the   
   pension plan for more than two decades, so the money is his.   
      
   Now serving a life sentence with no chance of parole for 25 years, the former   
   commander of CFB Trenton was also the target of three civil lawsuits: one   
   launched by “Jane Doe,” his first sexual assault victim; one by   
   Massicotte; and   
   another by the family of Jessica Lloyd, who was kidnapped from her home in   
   Belleville, Ont., and murdered inside Williams’s nearby cottage in Tweed. All   
   three lawsuits also named the former colonel’s wife, Mary Elizabeth Harriman,   
   alleging that she acquired her husband’s half of their $700,000 Ottawa home   
   in   
   a “fraudulent” post-arrest deal designed to shield his assets from the very   
   type of civil litigation he ended up facing. (Unlike the other two,   
   Massicotte’s lawsuit also seeks damages from the Ontario government for the   
   alleged “negligence” of the provincial police force, which she claims   
   should   
   have done more to warn her neighbourhood that a potential predator was on the   
   loose.)   
      
   As Maclean’s first reported in August, Williams reached an out-of-court   
   financial settlement in two of the cases (Jane Doe and the Lloyd family) and   
   both actions were simultaneously dismissed against his wife. But Massicotte’s   
   $7-million suit remains active—and, in recent months, her lawyers have   
   requested major amendments to her original statement of claim. Specifically,   
   Massicotte asked to alter her lawsuit to allege that Section 83 of the CF   
   Superannuation Act violates her Charter rights to life, liberty and security   
   because it deprives her of potential compensation for the “physical and   
   psychological losses” she endured.   
      
   In April, Justice Martin James refused to allow the proposed amendment, ruling   
   that a constitutional challenge would only “complicate and lengthen” a case   
   that is already more than two years old.  When Massicotte appealed the ruling,   
   Williams fought back—arguing that he “had no input or involvement in the   
   passage” of legislation that protect pensions from lawsuits, and if   
   Massicotte   
   wants to challenge the constitutionality of that system, she would need to sue   
   the federal government, not him.   
      
   In the end, Ontario’s top court sided with Williams.   
      
   “We see no basis to interfere with the motion judge’s conclusion,” said   
   Justice   
   C. William Hourigan, speaking for the unanimous three-judge panel.   
   “Declaratory   
   relief should have been sought against the federal government, not against Mr.   
   Williams and should therefore not be permitted.  Further, in our opinion, the   
   proposed amendments are premature.  The issue of whether Mr. Williams’s   
   pension   
   is exigible does not arise until after the final determination of issues as   
   currently pleaded.”   
      
   What happens next is not clear.  Williams’s lawyer, Pasquale Santini,   
   declined   
   to speak to reporters after the hearing, and Massicotte’s lawyer, Philip   
   Healey, said little more.  “There are different things that could happen   
   next,”   
   he said, “but I don’t want to comment on that.”  When asked how his   
   client is   
   holding up, Healey responded: “She has, of course, been through a lot, and   
   she   
   is doing the very best she can.”   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)