Killer murdered three
victims
Monday, 14 August 2017
The knife that killed Hanne Meketech, Terry
Blanchette and Hailey Dunbar-Blanchette cut in many ways, ultimately causing
grave injury to an entire community. After the discovery of Hanne's horrific
murder, , the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officers began to descend
upon the small mountain community of Coleman, Alberta, to try and solve the
case. From the discovery of Hanne's body on September 9th,
2015 to that of Terry's on September 14th, 2015, the entire area of the
Crowsnest Pass was on edge. And then there was the third horror and society’s
worst fear—a missing child. The discovery of Terry's lifeless body and Hailey's
disappearance initiated an Amber Alert. One hundred police officers were
involved in the case. Hailey’s face, beautiful and innocent, was all over the
news. To learn her gruesome fate had been devastating. The child had been
strangled and cut into pieces.
A jury had convicted Mr. Derek Saretzky of
first degree murder in the killing of Hanne Meketech, the killing of Terry
Blanchette, and the killing of Hailey Dunbar-Blanchette. The jury also
convicted him of offering an indignity to Hailey’s remains.
As part of the sentencing process, individuals
impacted by these offences were entitled to submit statements about the effect
these crimes have had upon them. The trial judge reviewed and considered
those statements for sentencing purposes and highlighted some of the more
salient features.
Mr. Saretzky gave a confession about the
murders of Terry and Hailey to Melisa Eye, who was a correctional peace officer
at the Calgary Remand Centre at the time.
Melisa Eye has found herself continually replaying the crime over and over, and
tried to drive images of the scene out of her head by using the Internet to
seek out pictures of Hailey smiling. She found it increasingly more difficult
when having to repeat her discussion with Mr. Saretzky over and over,
and sought counselling because of the stress this situation had caused her. Many
of the victims also expressed sorrow and kindness towards the Saretzky family.
Section 718 of
the Criminal Code sets
out the fundamental purpose of sentencing as the protection of society and
respect for the law and the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe
society by imposing just sanctions that have one or more of the following
objectives:
Relevant to the sentencing of Mr. Saretzky were
two additional Criminal Code provisions
dealing specifically with cumulative punishments.
Section 718.3(4)(b)(i) provides that
where offences do not arise out of the same event or series of events, a
sentencing judge shall consider imposing consecutive as opposed to concurrent
terms of imprisonment.
Since the deaths of Hanne Meketech, Terry Blanchette
and Hailey Dunbar-Blanchette occurred at three distinct times and at three
separate locations, the judge ruled them to be three separate and distinct
events. However, in consideration of section 745.51 of the Criminal Code, little turned on this ruling in this particular
case.
In 2011, the Criminal Code was
amended and section 745.21 and 745.51 were added. Under section745.21,
where a jury finds an accused guilty of murder and that accused has
previously been convicted of murder, the judge presiding at the trial shall ask
the jury for its recommendation concerning the period without eligibility for
parole to be served and whether these periods should run consecutively. The
section provides that where a jury chooses to make such recommendation, then
this will be considered by the Court in sentencing.
Under section 745.51(1): states that “at the time of the
sentencing under section 745 of an offender who is convicted of murder and who
has already been convicted of one or more other murders”, the Court may,
“having regard to the character of the offender, the nature of the offence and
the circumstances surrounding its commission, and the recommendation (by the
jury) if any, made pursuant to section 745.21, by order, decide that the
periods without eligibility for parole for each murder conviction are to be
served consecutively”.
Pursuant to section 745.21, the jury that
convicted Mr. Saretzky is entitled to make a recommendation about
whether the periods of parole ineligibility for the murders of Hailey and Hanne
should be consecutive or concurrent to the period of parole ineligibility for
the murder of Terry. This is a significant decision. If all concurrent,
then Mr. Saretzky would be eligible for parole after 25 years. If all
consecutive, he will not be eligible for parole for 75 years. This period of
parole ineligibility commences on the date of arrest. Therefore, after 75
years, Mr. Saretzky would be almost 100 years old, nearly
guaranteeing he will spend the rest of his life in prison.
The measures proposed in Bill C-48 will accomplish three
things. First, they will better reflect the tragedy of multiple murders by
enabling a judge to acknowledge each and every life lost.
Under previous law, multiple murderers serve life
sentences and corresponding parole ineligibility periods for each murder
concurrently. The result is that they serve only 25 years in custody before
being eligible for parole, no matter how many lives they may have taken.
Clifford Olsen killed ten young persons and was
sentenced to life without eligibility for parole until he served a minimum of
25 years in prison. After he served 25 years, his parole application was
denied. He eventually died in prison.
This symbolic devaluation of the lives of victims
has a strong negative impact on the families and loved ones of murder victims.
All too often they experience a greater degree of pain and experience a greater
sense of loss because the justice system has failed to mete out a specific
punishment for each and every life lost. Bill C-48 would help correct this.
Murder is the most serious crime and must be
denounced in the strongest terms. This has already been recognized by the
highest court of the land. In the 1987 Vaillancourt case, the Supreme Court of Canada
highlighted the extreme stigma attached to murder that flows from the moral
blameworthiness of deliberately taking the life of another person.
Bill C-48 would ensure that our
communities are safe and that offenders convicted of multiple murders, who
should never be released, will never be released. Alas, despite the penalties
for murder, that crime is still committed in Canada.
In this vein, the proposed amendments would also
protect the families and loved ones of multiple murder victims, who are forced
to listen all over again to the details of these horrible crimes at parole
hearings held after the maximum parole ineligibility period possible under the
current Act expires.
In the judge’s ruling he stated; “ For each conviction of first degree
murder, Mr. Saretzky’s sentence is life imprisonment, with no
chance of parole for 25 years. Given the jury’s verdict, they clearly accepted
that all three murders were planned and deliberate. For Hailey's murder, they
may have also found that her murder occurred in the course of her kidnapping
and forcible confinement, which would also ground a conviction for first degree
murder. I accept and agree with these findings. I also find that Hanne and
Terry were killed by a combination of blunt and sharp force trauma, and that
Hailey was killed by strangulation.” unquote
he judge also said, “The jury saw graphic
photos, listened to heart-wrenching testimony, and overall, has been through an
incredible ordeal. I watched them closely. And I commend each of them for their
conduct in this case. They never disengaged. They paid close attention to the
evidence, the arguments of counsel, and the instructions given to them. I
believe they took their obligation seriously, and that they put their personal
biases and emotions aside to carefully consider the issues.” unquote
He also said, “In addition to a finding of guilt
on three counts of first degree murder, the jury also returned a unanimous
decision that the parole ineligibility for the murders of Hailey and Hanne both
be served consecutively to the period of parole ineligibility for the murder of
Terry. In other words, the jury unanimously recommended
that Mr. Saretzky have no chance of parole for 75 years. This
recommendation did not have to be unanimous but all 12 jurors came to this
conclusion. This recommendation is not binding upon me, but it was a factor I
was obligated to take into account in my decision.” unquote
He then said, “I agree with the jury’s recommendation
that Mr. Saretzky should be imprisoned for 75 years without chance of
parole. I agree with the jury’s recommendation that the periods of parole
ineligibility for the murders of Hailey and Hanne should be served consecutively
to the period of parole ineligibility for Terry’s murder.” unquote
What was greatly, disturbing, is that
after . Saretzky killed Hanne, he had time to consider
his future actions. These murders were not conducted
simultaneously. Mr. Saretzky had days, and days, to think
about what he had done, and to abandon his continued plans of murder. Instead,
he did not. Instead, he used what he learned from conducting each murder to
successfully engage in other vicious acts of murder for all his victims
which was much more aggravating for Hailey.
In a case such as this, where an individual is
being given a sentence which spans a lifetime, the proportionality of the
sentence must be heavily weighed.
Pursuant to section 724(2)(b) of the Criminal Code, the
Court shall accept all facts essential to the jury’s guilty verdict as proven,
and that further, it is open to the Court to find any other relevant fact
proven by evidence.
In this case the Crown (prosecutor) argued that there were
facts relevant to the degree of planning and deliberation on the part
of Mr. Saretzky. These facts amount to aggravating factors for
sentencing purposes such that they demonstrate the extent, as the Crown
says, of Mr. Saretzky’s lack of remorse, his diabolical nature,
his tendency towards violence, his disregard for human life or its value, and
in effect the risk his freedom presents to Canadians and others.
A notebook belonging to Mr. Saretzky, was
entered into evidence, in which each victim’s name was written and then crossed
out. This by itself means that he was methodical in his murders.
Similarities between the deaths of Hanne Meketech
and Terry Blanchette, included breaking into each of their homes at night,
masked and with gloves on, the victims’ state of vulnerability at the times
they were attacked in their own bedrooms, and the tools and weapons used to
cause their deaths.
The fact
of Mr. Saretzky’s attendance at the Grassy Mountain Road
campsite on September 9, 2015, was just five days before he attended this place
to murder Hailey. On this September 9th visit he, as anyone else, would have noted the
privacy of the place, the fire pit and abundance of available firewood, which
ultimately aided him in committing his crime undetected, to destroy evidence,
and to desecrate the remains of Hailey.
The fact that five full days passed between the
murder of Hanne and that of Terry and Hailey. For these five
days Mr. Saretzky would have been surrounded by the grief and terror
of his entire community, and in particular the horror of his own grandparents
who were friends of Hanne. The reality of the hurt and fear he had caused did
not stop him from going further in his murders.
The fact that Hailey was only a 2 year old who was stolen from sleep in her crib, kidnapped from her home, her father murdered, and held hostage before being savagely murdered, and her remains violated and destroyed.
Finally, the fact that the gravity of
Saretzky’s actions increased with each of the murders he committed before
he was caught. First, cutting the throat of a woman alone and vulnerable in her
room at night; then bludgeoning and stabbing a man asleep in his own bed and
attempting to drain and drink his blood; and finally, removing a child from her
home and holding her hostage before strangling her in a remote location, and
then cannibalizing her remains before burning them. As he carried out these
three murders Mr. Saretzky gained momentum. This is obvious evidence
that this killer was horrible human monster.
In these extreme circumstances there is
overwhelming evidence that Saretzky is a deadly harm to his community. Hopes of
rehabilitating Saretzky can simply not carry the day where the objectives of
denunciation; deterrence; the need to separate the offender from society; and
the need for reparation for and acknowledgement of harm done to victims and
community are all so acutely engaged.
It is unfortunate indeed that this monster couldn’t
be put to death. It would save the taxpayers in Canada millions of dollars
keeping this monster caged for at least 75 years.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment