Nathalie Gettliffe Refuses to Meet With French Journalists At Alouette Prison in Canada

According to the Agence-France Presse, Nathalie Gettliffe, imprisoned in the Alouette Correctional Centre in Maple Ridge, near Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, apparently refused to meet with a group of French journalists who had arrived with the purpose of inspecting the prison and the conditions under which Nathalie and her infant son, Martin, are forced to live.

She explained her decision in a handwritten document, underlining the possibility that all information regarding her detention could be perceived in a "negative manner" by the judge who will decide her sentencing at the beginning of December, next month.

A group of a half a dozen of French journalists visited the prison on Thursday, according to a trip organized by the Canadian Embassy in France, which was intended to review and report on the Canadian judicial system and the Canadian penitentiary.

Ms Gettliffe did not wish to meet the group. One of the journalists wrote a letter asking to speak with her, but she replied in writing something to the effect of, and we paraphrase, 'I cannot speak to you due to a sentencing hearing coming up on November 30 and the 1st December. All positive or negative information concerning my current conditions of detention can be perceived in a negative manner by the judge in charge of ruling. I remain therefore silent and in suffering, on the counsel of my lawyer. Thank-you again for caring about my case and Martin.'

Nathalie Gettliffe referred to her baby son to whom she gave birth on September 26, during her detention. The Canadian authorities indicated Wednesday that an audience devoted to the sentence of Ms Gettliffe would take place on November 30 and 1st December.

The 35 year-old mother of four pled guilty to the accusation to have removed, in 2001, the two children of her marriage with the Canadian, Scott Grant, an offence of a maximum penalty of 10 years of prison.

Her guilty plea avoids the trials that should have begun November 20. It remains for the judge to decide sentencing after having heard the respective arguments of the accusation and defense at the end of November.

The young mother was arrested in Vancouver on April 11 2006 and has been forced to remain in prison as two Canadian Supreme Court Judges have denied her bail.

The two children of Nathalie Gettliffe's marriage to Scott Grant are currently court-ordered to live with him in Canada.

Nathalie Gettliffe refuse de recevoir un groupe de journalistes français

AFP 16.11.06 | 22h58

Nathalie Gettliffe, incarcérée au Canada depuis avril pour l'enlèvement de deux de ses enfants, a refusé jeudi de s'entretenir avec un groupe de journalistes français venus la rencontrer et visiter sa prison.
La Française a expliqué sa décision dans une note manuscrite, soulignant que toute information sur ses conditions de détention pourrait être perçue "de façon négative" par le juge qui décidera de sa peine début décembre.

Un groupe d'une demi-douzaine de journalistes français a visité jeudi sa prison, le centre correctionnel pour femmes à Maple Ridge (ouest), dans le cadre d'un voyage organisé par l'ambassade du Canada en France pour mieux faire connaître le système judiciaire et pénitentiaire canadien.

Mme Gettliffe n'a pas souhaité rencontrer le groupe. Celui-ci lui a alors adressé un lettre demandant un entretien, requête à laquelle Mme Gettliffe a répondu par écrit.

"Je ne peux pas vous parler car j'ai une audience de remise de peine le 30 novembre et le 1er décembre. Toute information positive ou négative concernant mes conditions actuelles de détention peuvent être perçues de façon négative par le juge chargé de statuer. Je reste donc silencieuse et dans la souffrance, sur les conseils de mon avocat", a-t-elle expliqué.

"Merci encore de vous préoccuper de mon dossier et de Martin", a ajouté Mme Gettliffe en évoquant le bébé auquel elle a donné naissance le 26 septembre, pendant sa détention.

La justice canadienne a indiqué mercredi qu'une audience consacrée à la sentence de Mme Gettliffe aurait lieu les 30 novembre et 1er décembre.

La femme âgée de 35 ans, a plaidé coupable de l'accusation d'avoir enlevé, en 2001, les deux enfants de son mariage avec le Canadien Scott Grant, un délit passible d'une peine maximale de 10 ans de prison.

Son plaidoyer de culpabilité évite le procès qui aurait dû commencer le 20 novembre et il appartient désormais au juge de fixer la sentence après avoir entendu les arguments respectifs de l'accusation et de la défense, lors des audiences du 30 novembre et 1er décembre.

La jeune femme avait été arrêtée à Vancouver le 11 avril 2006 et est en prison depuis cette date, la justice canadienne ayant refusé à deux reprises de la remettre en liberté conditionnelle.

Elle avait justifié son départ du Canada pour la France en 2001 en expliquant qu'elle voulait soustraire ses deux enfants à l'influence de leur père, membre de l'Eglise internationale du Christ, considérée comme un mouvement sectaire par un rapport parlementaire français, mais légale au Canada.

Les deux enfants de son mariage avec M. Grant ont été remis à leur père par la justice française en juillet dernier et vivent actuellement avec lui au Canada.

La juge Garson est depuis le début en faveur de Scott Grant :

- le 6 septembre 2001, Garson accorde la garde exclusive au père, une semaine après le départ de la mère et elle lance un mandat d'arrêt, sans avoir pris la peine de permettre à Nathalie une défense et une explication (via un avocat...) du pourquoi de son départ.
Cette décision était inutile pour entamer une procédure de retour "Convention de La
Haye", qui était possible dès la date de la violation des droits de visite du père
(j'ignore si il avait ce droit de visite avant le 6 septembre 2001, mais c'est possible)
Que cette décision ait été prise sans possibilité de défense aurait dû alerter la justice française (dans d'autres cas, avec d'autres pays, cela est venu à l'appui d'un refus de retour des enfants...)

- en 2004, Garson a attribué à Scott Grant quelque 78 000 dollars qui appartenaient à la mère de Nathalie et dont il n'était que gestionnaire, avec aucun droit de propriété; elle aurait voulu que Nathalie se présente en personne devant elle...
De quel droit une juge peut "punir" une femme en volant sa mère ?

Je n'ai pas la décision, malgré ma demande à Vincent Pigeon, car la mère de Nathalie

- fin 2004, Garson a levé le mandat d'arrêt et annulé sa décision du 6 septembre 2004, sur demande de Scott Grant, qui acceptait d'entrer dans un médiation internationale.

- fin 2005, Garson a de nouveau décidé que la garde exclusive serait à SG, sur demande de celui-ci.
Elle n'ignorait pas qu'une médiation était en cours, elle n'a pas pris le soin de vérifier si elle était ou non terminée sur un échec ou alors a été trompée.

La mère n'avait pas été du tout prévenue et c'est par hasard qu'elle l'a su.
Plus vicieux encore, c'est en novembre 2005, donc après cette décision, que les services de l'AG de BC ont envoyé à Nathalie... une copie de la décision d'annulation datant de 2001 !
Louis Ripault, Paris France

Canadian Families Shocked by Light Sentence for Sexual Offenders

Families shocked by sentence for Winnipeg couple who sexually assaulted teens

14 Nov, 6:34 PM

WINNIPEG (CP) - Family members of two young sex assault victims cursed and sobbed in court Tuesday after a judge handed down what they considered light sentences for a husband and wife who lured the girls to their home and raped them.

Winnipeg police and justice officials have called the case one of the worst they've ever seen, and it has drawn comparisons to the shocking sex murders of two Ontario schoolgirls by Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka.

The 25-year-old woman, who was convicted of three counts of sexual assault and forcible confinement, was to be released Tuesday after Justice Gerald Jewers gave her a sentence equal to the two years she spent in pretrial custody.

Her common-law husband, who was convicted of eight charges including kidnapping and sexual assault, was sentenced to seven additional years in prison. Jewers said he was given less credit for time served because of his "continuous and appalling bad behaviour" in custody.
The pair, dressed in matching grey sweatshirts, chatted amicably in the prisoners box while waiting for Jewers to arrive.

As the man, now 34, was led out of the courtroom in handcuffs, he aimed a smile towards some of the victims' relatives and rubbed his hands together.

"I'm very upset," one woman said through tears as she left the courthouse. "My family's very upset."

Another woman said the female accused was Manitoba's answer to Karla Homolka.

One young victim testified that as a 12-year-old she was held as a sex slave by the couple for several months, given pills and alcohol and tied to a bed and raped.

The victim, now 14, said she was twice abducted off the street, including one time that involved her being thrown in the trunk of a car.

The girl is a cousin of the woman. Her attackers are not being named in order to protect her identity.

Another victim, now 20 years old, testified she was 13 when she started going to the couple's house, where she was offered free liquor. The first time, the man raped her while the wife held her down, she said.

Fear kept her going back to the house, every weekend for a year or two, because the man told her he knew Hells Angels members and he would torture and kill her and her family, she said.

The girl became pregnant with the man's child when she was 16.

Crown prosecutor Jill Duncan had asked for sentences of up to 18 years for the man and up to eight years for his spouse.

She said both girls are still struggling to recover from their ordeal, but a psychological assessment of the 14-year-old victim is especially discouraging.

"This girl has no hope, she has no dreams, she has no future," said Duncan. "It's unfathomable the damage this girl has undertaken."

During a sentencing hearing last month, Duncan said the crimes could only be described as evil.

"The extent of the depravity and perverseness of this case is rarely seen."

Duncan noted that while she never mentioned in court the similarities to the Bernardo and Homolka case, the comparison has been made to her "innumerable times."

Bernardo is serving a life sentence for the sex slayings of Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy in the early 1990s.

His former wife, Homolka, is living in Montreal after serving her full 12-year manslaughter sentence.

The Winnipeg couple faced 21 charges, but Jewers said not all the charges were proven to his satisfaction.

"What remains is serious enough."

He said the couple showed no remorse and did not spare their victims the trauma of testifying.

But he also noted the woman did not have a prior record and the man had only one dated, minor conviction that was unrelated to the current charges.

Defence lawyer Jeff Nichols, who represents the man, said he'll review the merits of an appeal, especially on the judge's decision not to grant the standard credit of double-time for pretrial custody.

He said it is "a tremendous exaggeration" to compare the case to Bernardo.

"There was a lot of evidence presented that ultimately, at the end of the day, the court decided not to accept," said Nichols.


News from © The Canadian Press

La Justice Refuse a Nathalie Gettliffe La Garde Conjointe De Ses Enfants

AFP. Publié le 14 novembre 2006Actualisé le 14 novembre 2006 : 21h46

Nathalie Gettliffe, emprisonnée au Canada depuis avril pour l'enlèvement des deux enfants de son mariage avec le Canadien Scott Grant, ne s’est pas vu accorder la garde des deux enfants.

La Française avait demandé dans une action au civil à se voir reconnaître la garde conjointe des enfants. Mais la juge Nicole Garson, de la Cour suprême de Colombie-Britannique, a refusé de se prononcer sur sa demande, tant que la Française est encore en prison.

Elle a ainsi confirmé, au moins temporairement, la garde des deux enfants âgés de 11 ans pour l'un et de bientôt 13 ans pour l'autre à leur père Scott Grant.

Judge Garson Rebukes Nathalie Gettliffe in B.C. Supreme Court

14 Nov, 5:16 PM

VANCOUVER (CP) - A French woman who abducted her kids received a scathing rebuke from the judge in her child custody case Tuesday.

In the latest instalment of what has been described as an international soap opera, Justice Nicole Garson decided that the ex-husband of Nathalie Gettliffe would keep interim custody of the children but Gettliffe would be allowed more frequent visits.

The judge didn’t mince words about Gettliffe’s conduct over the past five years as she ruled that Scott Grant, father of Max, 12, and Josephine, 11, would continue to have interim custody. Permanent custody will be sorted out a trial sometime in the future.

“In this case, Miss Gettliffe has denied (the children) permission to love their father,” Garson said in her ruling on the custody battle.

“This order is designed to redress to the extent possible that harm.”

The case has attracted wide attention, particularly in France, over the woman’s abduction of the children to France from Vancouver in 2001.

The case’s twists and turns have included citings of the Hague Convention, nasty accusations in France against her ex-husband, Gettliffe’s voluntary return in immediate arrest in Vancouver, charges that she was abused in prison where she also gave birth to a new son, and allegations that her Canadian ex-husband belonged to a cult-like church.

Gettliffe also announced recently that she wants to run for the presidency of France.

On the criminal side of the ledger, she pleaded guilty to abduction in B.C. Supreme Court earlier this month and will be sentenced later.

On Tuesday, as Grant sat in court and the former couple’s two lawyers handling the civil matter listened to the oral ruling, the judge raked Gettliffe over the coals. At the conclusion, Grant’s lawyer, Theresa Stowe, turned and smiled broadly at him.

“Miss Gettliffe has conducted a publicity campaign to support her decision to defy the Canadian and French court orders,” said Garson.

“She set up an Internet website and association to protect her children. She has made numerous public statements about Mr. Grant and his religious practices. She has exposed her children to the public campaign.”

The judge said Gettliffe appeared “completely without insight as to any potential damage such a custody battle could have on her children.”

Gettliffe had asked the court to see her children twice weekly but the judge sided with Grant, who wanted two visits a month. Still, that order allowed her more visits than the total of six times the children have visited her in jail since April.

The children now live with the father alone in suburban Surrey, B.C., but they “are not affectionate with him” as they were before their abduction.

“The children have been rude and angry at times,” the judge said, allowing that they miss their mother.

She said their behaviour was not surprising since they have spent little time with their father in the past five years.

“I infer from the evidence that they have been told over the past five years that he was not a suitable father,” said Garson.

The children must have time to establish affection “without interference from her.”

“That relationship cannot be nurtured if Miss Gettliffe continues her campaign of vilifying Mr. Grant to the children.”

While she will be allowed more frequent visits, the court ordered her to refrain from making “adverse comments” about the father or his church.

She must also not discuss with the kids any possible return to France.

The jail visits must be supervised because Gettliffe does not appreciate the impact on her children of her “very public campaign” against Grant.

Gettliffe also had asked the court to allow her children contact with friends and relatives in France, but the judge again sided with Grant and left it to him to decide on the degree of contact.

“I am also concerned that such communications might be misused by Miss Gettliffe, her husband or supporters in their continued efforts to maintain public support for the custody battle.

Gettliffe was arrested in April when she returned to defend her PhD thesis in linguistics at the University of British Columbia.

The judge suggested that she returned because her arrest and contempt order, issued in 2001 after she fled, were set aside in 2004 at Grant’s request.

“He took this step because he believed Miss Gettliffe might voluntarily return to Canada if she were not in jeopardy of being arrested,” the judge said.

Gettliffe said previously she took her children to France to remove them from the influence of their father because of his activities in a church that’s considered a cult in France - the International Church of Christ.

But the judge said Gettliffe never talked disparagingly of his church until she reached France.

Although the mother had also asked the court to prevent Grant from taking the kids to his church, the judge allowed him to take them but no more than once a week.

French Journalists Travel To Vancouver, Canada to Report On Nathalie Gettliffe Case

Word on the street has it that at least 10 French journalists are on their way to Vancouver, British Columbia, in Canada, for a week to report on the living conditions of Nathalie Gettliffe and her infant son, Martin Gruzelle-Gettliffe.

We're not yet sure if this is sponsored by the French or Canadian government, but it is an interesting development nonetheless.

Nathalie Gettliffe has been incarcerated since April this year, and her two young children, Josephine and Maximillien Gettliffe-Grant have been forced to live in Canada against their wills with their father, Scott Grant.
Neither child speaks English, as they have been raised in France for the past five years.
We are waiting to hear from the Ministry of Children and Family Development in British Columbia to understand how they will assist the children to visit their mother and infant brother on a regular basis, given that Scott Grant appears to deny them this right, at whim.

We are concerned for the children, that they have been caught up in a manipulated situation where one spouse is taking advantage of the criminal justice sytem in order to punish his former wife, despite the fact that he signed a document stating that he agreed that their children would live their mother in France.

Something smells awful in the land of Canada....

Ministry of Children and Family Development of B.C. Replies Regarding Josephine and Maximilien Gettliffe-Grant

----- Original Message -----
From: McNeill, Bruce MCF:EX
To: lisa@canadachildrenfirst.com
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 4:05 PM
Subject: Your letter to the Deputy Minister


(reference #: 156380)

September 8, 2006

Lisa Haeck
Director, Canada Children First
British Columbia Canada

Dear Ms Haeck

The Deputy Minister of Children and Family Development, Lesley du Toit, has requested that I respond to your e-mail letter of August 24, 2006. I wish to thank you for taking the time to bring these concerns to the Deputy Minister’s attention.

Your letter expressed concerns about the welfare of two children who were repatriated to Canada recently and whose mother is now incarcerated. While I am not, due to privacy and confidentiality considerations, able to discuss an individual family’s circumstances with you, I can assure you that in such situations, the Ministry is very willing to provide family support services.

Thank you once again for your letter.



Yours truly

Bruce McNeill,
Director of Child Welfare, Fraser Region
(604)586-2628 Fax (604) 586-4153
"Value the Vulnerable"

Lettres de Prison: Nathalie Gettliffe

Description du produit
Présentation de l'éditeurLes autorités de la Colombie-Britannique lui avaient interdit de quitter le territoire avec ses deux enfants. Seulement ces enfants étaient en danger, prisonniers d'une secte dont son ex-mari canadien fait partie depuis plusieurs années. Alors Nathalie Gettliffe, une jeune Française de 35 ans, s'est enfuie avec eux dans son pays natal. Donc elle a bafoué la loi. Mais est-ce une raison pour la traiter comme une dangereuse criminelle ? Au fil des lettres qu'elle a envoyées à ses proches et que présente ici son nouveau compagnon, on découvre peu à peu le traquenard dans lequel elle est tombée. Arrestation dès qu'elle pose le pied à Vancouver où elle était censée venir signer un protocole d'accord. Incarcération dans des conditions abominables, sans égards pour la santé du bébé qu'elle attend. Omniprésence de la secte dans les coulisses des prétoires et de la presse, refus de mise en liberté provisoire. Au terme d'un procès prévu en novembre 2006, Nathalie Gettliffe risque... dix ans de prison. Mais elle continue de lutter, et de demander qu'on lui vienne en aide. Ces lettres sont aussi publiées dans ce but.

La Visite Prevue de Max et Josephine, les enfants de Nathalie Gettliffe, a ete annulee

Report de l’audience préparatoire au procès. La Colombie-Britannique continue dans le lamentable…Une communication téléphonique de Nathalie avec sa maman dimanche 22: Martin va bien mais la visite prévue de Max et Jo a été annulée. Aucune raison invoquée pour les deux cas...

1 – Avis de recherche
Afin de préparer le procès il faut absolument que nous ayons les contacts suivants :
-A Vancouver l’ex épouse de Tom KRIEDEMAN berger spirituel de Scott que Nathalie a supporté bien des jours et des soirées (voir des nuits) dans sa maison avant de fuir de guerre lasse. Ce Tom a vu sa femme, une Autrichienne, le quitter. Son contact en vue de témoignage nous est indispensable.

-A Vancouver l’ex-épouse du procureur Mike LUCHENKO qui vit avec la mère de Scott Grant et qui a signé le bulletin d’écrou illégal de Nathalie.

-Pour les recherches en France: essayer de savoir la réalité du centre Tomatis de Vancouver dans lequel travaillait sous ce vocable Larré et sa bande. Est-ce une émergence officielle du Tomatis Français ?

2 - Enfants
Rien de neuf sur leur état de santé… le Ministère des Affaires Etrangères, contacté par téléphone lundi, ne dit rien connaître de nouveau; le Consul de Vancouver ayant été saisi (encore et encore !!!). L’association ne peut essayer d’en savoir plus au risque de faire payer aux enfants notre aide et de voir reprocher à Nathalie lors du procès notre action qui sera retenue contre elle.

3 - Nathalie, 199 jours de détention…
Pour répondre à la question de la négociation avec Scott Grant, nous sommes dans la situation de 38 : il n’est ni possible ni utile de négocier avec un pervers. L’histoire de Nathalie nous montre même qu’il est dangereux de négocier avec Scott lequel n’ayant aucun sens de l’altérité, est le type même du pervers.
Pervers qui se dit bon chrétien charitable mais- jouit de voir son ex-épouse en prison pour punition de ne pas lui avoir obéi,- prend son pied à accompagner ses enfants voir leur mère coupable en tôle,- exulte de se venger de la nouvelle cellule familiale crée en maintenant Martin le frère et fils en incarcération.

Oui c’est vraiment une bonne et charitable Eglise que celle qu’il fréquente… il n’est pas étonnant que le « père » Larre prêtre condamné pour violence et pédophilie soit dans cette mouvance, d’autant que l’Archidiocèse de Vancouver, auquel il a été imposé après sescrimes, s’en démarque très nettement.
Diffusez ce bulletin aux amis sûr et autorités…
Jean-Louis BAERT
Président de l'association
S'unir pour protéger Maximilen et Joséphine.

Women Barred from Justice

Women barred from justice
Conditions for women in prisons in BC are deplorable and unnecessary
by Sonia Marino
Although the vast majority of women in prison are incarcerated for non-violent offences and pose no threat to the community, many women in prison in BC are held under conditions that are far more severe than their crime warrants. The closure of the Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women in 2004 has brought many changes for women in prison in BC.

Provincially-sentenced women (those sentenced to less than two years) are now mainly held in the Alouette Correctional Centre for Women in Maple Ridge. Many of the women imprisoned at Alouette are classified as minimum security but have no access to a minimum-security prison environment. The conditions at Alouette are officially said to be designed for women classified as medium security, but a full perimeter fence and other security measures suggest that the conditions are actually more like maximum security.

However, provincially-sentenced women designated as maximum security are held in virtual isolation in a maximum security unit inside the Surrey Pretrial Centre, a men’s prison. Women are serving time in men's lock-ups all over the province (including in the Prince George Regional Correctional Centre) under conditions that are not appropriate to either their gender or their security classification.

Federally-sentenced women (those sentenced to two years or more) are now held in the Fraser Valley Institution for Women in Abbotsford. Although Fraser Valley already has a maximum-security perimeter, a new Maximum Security Unit has been built (at great expense) and is scheduled to open in August 2005. Yet despite a recommendation by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Correctional Service of Canada has failed to build a minimum security unit at Fraser Valley outside the perimeter. Women designated as minimum security are living under maximum security conditions at this prison.

At the Burnaby Correctional Centre for Women, women with a minimum security designation had access to an open living unit which held up to 28 minimum security prisoners. When the Burnaby centre closed, the cell space for women prisoners in BC increased by over 100 beds, but women designated minimum security no longer have access to a minimum security prison.

The only real minimum security prison for federally sentenced women in Canada is the Isabel McNeill Minimum Security House in Kingston, Ontario. The Correctional Service of Canada keeps threatening to close Isabel McNeill, however, so women are hesitant to transfer there.

Having access to a minimum security prison is essential for women, as they require opportunities to leave the prison to work and to build community supports to prepare for release. Being held in a higher security prison means being subjected to much more intense surveillance, having less access to programs, and remaining more isolated from the community, all of which put women at a disadvantage when it comes to release from prison.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission recently concluded that “the lack of minimum security facilities for federally-sentenced women prevents them from being incarcerated in the least restrictive conditions possible as required by the Corrections and Conditional Release Act …

Thus, minimum security women live with physical barriers such as fences, locked gates, razor wire and cameras while their male counterparts tend to be housed in facilities that do not even have chain-link fences.”

Despite the fact that almost half of federally sentenced women are designated as minimum security prisoners, only a handful of those women have access to a minimum security facility.
With the announced closure of Kingston’s notorious Prison for Women in 1994, five regional prisons were built. These prisons were supposed to incorporate a more holistic approach to women’s imprisonment based on empowerment, meaningful and responsible choices, respect and dignity, shared responsibility, and supportive environments.

In 1996, after a walkaway escape, slashings and suicide attempts by women in the new regional prisons, the Correctional Services Commission responded by transferring all women classified as maximum security out of the women’s prisons and into isolated sections of men’s maximum security prisons. For the past nine years women have been held in isolation in men’s maximum security prisons.

On March 8 th 2001, the women in Saskatchewan Penitentiary brought a discrimination complaint against Correctional Services. The Canadian Human Rights Commission agreed to investigate. In January 2004 they found discrimination against federally sentenced women based on gender, race and disability, and made 19 recommendations for change. The report, Protecting Their Rights, can be viewed online at chrc-ccdp.ca.

Rather than moving the women out of the men’s prisons and into the existing women’s prisons, Correctional Service has started building new maximum security units within prisons that are already designed for maximum security prisoners. Some of these new maximum security units have already opened, and the conditions under which the women now live are still not equivalent to the conditions for maximum security men: they are much harsher, and more in line with the super maximum conditions at Special Handling Units in men’s prisons.

According to Filis Iverson, prison abolitionist and prison justice day organizer, women in these new “Max Units” spend their first six months locked in their cells, only to come out for doctor’s appointments and visits; they are not allowed to communicate with any other prisoners; and when they come out of their cells they are in leg shackles and handcuffs, and are escorted by two or more guards. “A woman can work her way to the next step where there are no shackles,” Filis explains, “just handcuffs and two guards. But if at any point she exhibits ‘inappropriate behaviour’ she can be sent back to the first step. When one prisoner is out of her cell, all other prisoners are locked up.”
This level of security is not justifiable in terms of women’s crime nor women’s threat to the community. Women are a low risk to re-offend and have high needs in terms of treatment and healing from physical and sexual abuse, substance abuse, employment training, and education.

The majority of maximum security classified women are First Nations women and women with mental health issues. The needs of women in society have been turned into risk factors and as a result women who are the most socially and economically disadvantaged are classified as maximum security.

Despite the fact that a new provincial prison for women at Alouette opened recently in BC, large numbers of provincial women prisoners in this province are being held in men’s lock-ups in virtual isolation. While some northern or rural women might choose this option because it is preferable to being transferred to a women’s prison so far from home and community, others are being held in the Surrey Pre-trial Centre, a men’s lock-up just a short distance away from the women’s prison. Any woman who is being held on remand or on an immigration hold or who is classified as maximum security is being held in an isolated section of the Surrey Pretrial Centre, or other men’s lock-ups in rural communities across the province.
This is unacceptable.

With ample space and a full perimeter fence at Alouette, there is no reason why these women cannot be removed from Surrey Pre-trial (or other men’s lock-ups if they so choose) and held at Alouette. There are few programs and resources available to women held in men’s prisons. The women are being held in virtual isolation, segregated from the programs and treatment that are needed for release.

We encourage you to write to Premier Gordon Campbell and Solicitor General Wally Oppal and urge them to stop holding women in men’s prisons in BC.
This article was written by the Prison Justice Day Committee. Come to the Prison Justice Day Memorial Rally on Wednesday, August 10 th at 7pm at Trout Lake Park in East Vancouver to show your solidarity and support for prisoners and prison justice. For more information, visit prisonjustice.ca
****

No Charges To be Laid Against Actress Denise Richards, say RCMP in Vancouver, Canada

Denise Richards

Speaking of injustice....
Did I read correctly? This Hollywood actress/Playboy centrefold injured two elderly women in a Richmond hotel, this past week and the Canadian police won't press charges???
There were over 30 witnesses to Richards's aggressive attack on the reporter and her subsequent violent reaction which caused injuries to two people in the crowd.
In any other circumstance, this would be known as "aggravated assault" or plain and simple, "assault".

Corporal Peter Thiessen, of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, (RCMP), said on Friday that it is not in the public interest to press criminal charges.
Why not? How do we know that Richards won't throw something else into a crowd next week or next month and injure two children?

What is so special about Denise Richards that she cannot be charged?
In the United States law enforcement has not hesitated to charge Wynona Rider and Daniel Baldwin for theft, which seems minor in comparison to aggressively injuring two elderly ladies.

In our opinion, it doesn't matter who you are lady, the law is supposed to be equal for all. Obviously, in this case, it is more "equal" for a Hollywood actress than for Dr. Nathalie Gettliffe, a Mother of four children who remains imprisoned in Maple Ridge, near Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, for trying to protect her children from harm.

There is something very, very wrong with the Canadian justice system: mothers and fathers like Nathalie Gettliffe, Carline vandenelsen and Larry Finck and Rob Nicholson come forward to seek protection for their children and are punished/imprisoned/fined or castigated by judges who appear to have lost their minds...
Pedophiles and those who commit crimes against children, like Robin Sharp, David Frost and Dr. Lucien Larre are free to walk the streets.
How on earth are Canadians and their children supposed to feel safe in their communities if the "law" is so unequal?

Parlons de l’injustice…
Ai-t-je lu correctement ? Ceci la pin-up d’actrice de Hollywood a blessé deux femmes âgées dans un hôtel de Richmond, cette semaine passée, et la police canadienne n’appuieront pas de charges ? ? ?
Il y avait par-dessus 30 témoins à l’assaut de Richards agressif sur le journaliste et sa réaction violente subséquente qui ont causé des blessures à deux gens dans la foule.
Dans aucune autre circonstance, ceci serait su comme « a aggravé l’assaut » ou la plaine et simple, l’ « assaut ».

Peter Thiessen, corporal du Canadien Royal Mounted Police, (RCMP), dit vendredi que ce n’est pas dans l’intérêt public pour produire les charges.
Pourquoi pas ? Comment savons-nous que Richards ne lanceront pas quelque chose d’autre dans une foule ou le mois prochain et blesse la semaine prochaine deux enfants ?

Quel est si spécial de Denise Richards qu’elle ne peut pas être chargée ?
Dans les Etats-Unis que l’application de la loi n’a pas hésité pour charger Wynona Rider, Daniel Baldwin pour le vol, qui semble le mineur dans la comparaison à blessant d’une manière agressive deux dames âgées.

Il n’a pas d’importance qui vous êtes Madame, la loi est supposée pour être l’égal pour tout. Evidemment, dans ce cas, c’est plus « égal » pour une actrice de Hollywood que pour Dr. Nathalie Gettliffe, une Mère de quatre enfants qui reste emprisonnés dans Maple Ridge, (approcher de Vancouver, Colombie Britannique, Canada), pour essayer de protéger ses enfants du mal.

Il y a quelque chose très, très mauvais avec le système de justice canadien : les mères et les pères comme Nathalie Gettliffe, Carline vandenelsen et Larry Finck et Rob Nicholson est présenté se chercher la protection pour leurs enfants et est puni/emprisonné/condamné à une amende ou fustigé par les juges qui apparaît avoir perdu leurs esprits...
Les pédophiles et ceux qui commettent des crimes contre les enfants, comme Robin Sharp, la David Frost et Dr. Lucien Larre est libre de marcher les rues.
Comment les Canadiens et leurs enfants sont-ils supposés pour se sentir sûrs dans leurs communautés si la « loi » est s’inégale ?


Last Updated: Friday, November 10, 2006 3:23 PM PT
CBC News
American actress Denise Richards will not be charged in connection with an altercation with two photographers earlier this week at Richmond's River Rock Casino, the RCMP say.
RCMP spokesman Cpl. Peter Thiessen said Friday it's not in the public interest to press criminal charges.
Actress Denise Richards had a run-in with paparazzi in Richmond, B.C., this week.(Chris Pizzello/Associated Press) He added that Richards, her management company and the photographers have agreed to settle the matter of damages civilly.
Richards is in Greater Vancouver shooting the film Blonde and Blonder with Pamela Anderson, who is originally from Vancouver Island.
Wednesday evening's incident was apparently triggered when two photographers got on to the set of the film on the second floor of the casino without permission
Richards was accused of throwing the photographers' laptop computers over the railing into the lobby below, where they grazed two elderly women.
Police said neither the 80-year-old nor the 91-year-old was seriously injured. They were at the casino as part of an organized visit from a Lower Mainland seniors' facility.
Richards has been in the spotlight recently after she split with actor Charlie Sheen.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2006/11/10/bc-denise-richards.html#skip300x250