Do you consider parole aPAULing? The case of Paul Bernardo

A podcast that describes the horrible toll that the Paul Bernardo parole hearing has taken on the victims.

Insight on the Paul Bernardo's parole hearing and the outcome

Paul Bernardo

"That's what I had back then, so I used sex as a vice, Now, I work out. I wake up every day knowing I'm not psychopathic. I care about people. I cried during 9/11. I cried during Columbine."

From Haliburton Highlands, it’s The Criminally Sound, with the Courage to Dig Deep. I’m Amanda Syran. We will be delving into the myths and facts about parole, while analyzing the facts of Paul Bernardo’s parole hearing.

Parole: Myth vs. Realities

Have you ever wondered why we have parole or what it is? I know I have talked to many people who have the wrong idea about what parole is. The myths can be damaging, that is why I am here to tell you the reality of parole.

The majority of prisoners are serving a fixed level sentence meaning once they are done their sentence they may go back into the community. Atr 7 years or 1/3 of their sentence, whichever is less, is when a prisoner is eligible to apply for full parole. Many people are under the impression that parole allows people to serve a shorter sentence, but parole is a program that allows prisoners to join the community while still serving their sentences. Parole allows prisoners to begin gradually reintegrate into the community and acquire law-abiding and pro-social lifestyles in a controlled and supportive environment before they are released from prison by the end of their sentence. It does not allow prisoners to get off more quickly, but allows them to serve their sentence in a controlled manner in the community. The possibility of parole is dependent on conditions which allow some of the offenders to serve part of their sentence in the community under the supervision of a parole officer (Canadian Government).

Another popular misconception is that once an inmate is eligible for parole that they are automatically granted parole. Whether or not a prisoner is released into the community can depend on the risk of the prisoners being safely managed in the community and if they will contribute productively to society. The courts discuss social and criminal history, understanding of their offense, progress made or programs completed, behavior in the institution/on previous conditional release, risk assessment, community supports, and victim statements to decide if a prisoner is acceptable for parole. Their is a lot of consideration before an inmate is granted parole (Canadian Government).

Another myth is that day parole and full parole are the same. Day parole is different from full parole because it is only for a day and requires they return to their prison or halfway house nightly, while full parole is for the rest of there sentence as long as the conditions are met. Day parole has different factors than full paroles that courts look at when deciding to allow or deny a parole application. Day parole usually happens for special occasions like holidays with the family. Serving life or indeterminate sentences are eligible to apply for day parole three years before their full parole eligibility date or after three years, whichever is greater (Canadian Government).

A big myth among the population is that offenders on parole can live their lives freely. In fact most parole officers contain the offender in a designated area of work and living in Canada. The offenders must obey the law and be on good behavior. The parole officers must be notified if there are any changes to their employment of living situation and the offender must report everything to their parole officers. On special cases a parole officer can impose these conditions on the offender to reside in a halfway house; to abstain from alcohol and non-prescribed drugs; to avoid contact with their victims or children unless accompanied by an adult; and to refrain from associations with people involved in criminal activity. If any of these conditions are not met by the offender their release/parole may be revoked and they would have to finish their sentence in jail (Canadian Government).

A big misconception of the parole system is that offenders released on parole are often convicted of new crimes. This statement is proven to be a misconception due to a study from 2013-2014 that had found that 99% of federal day parole periods were successfully completed by offenders without re-offending, while offenders who attain full parole have a 97% of completing their sentence without re-offending. The study concluded that over 99% of parole periods were successfully completed without violent offences (Canadian Government).

Many citizens believe that society would be better protected if criminals remained in prison until they have completed their sentences. A study that has been conducted based on several years has deduced that when offenders have been returned to the community through conditional release (parole) offenders are much more likely to become productive law-abiding citizens than when they finish their sentence in prison (Canadian Government).

Citizens often are under the impression that victims of the offence have no role or their feelings are not considered in the parole hearing process, when in fact, the victims have the opportunity to present the ongoing effects of the crime and safety concerns, which may be presented in the form of audio, video or written account. This includes requests from victims to impose release conditions deemed necessary for their protection. Victims may remain in contact with officers or the parole board while the offender are under sentence and provide any additional information they believe should be considered in the decisions. This information is used in decisions about an offender's institutional placement, programs and release. It may be a critical factor in those decisions where the physical security of the victim may be at risk (Canadian Government).

These myths may be detrimental to society, victims and offenders who are becoming law-abiding citizens

Parole hearings and impact

An interesting and unique case is Paul Bernardo’s, a man who is a serial killer and rapist. Debbie Mahaffy, our special guest, knows the Bernardo case all too well. Her Daughter Leslie Mahaffy was raped and murdered by Paul Bernardo. In addition, he killed 3 other girls; convicted of 13 rapes, and at least 6 attempted rapes. He made his first application for parole after 25 years in prison for some of the most horrific crimes in Canadian history. His parole hearing was held on the 17th of Oct, 2018. Debbie a mother of one of Bernrdo’s victims gave a statement at the hearing. In the following clip, Debbie is describing the pain her family had to go through by the hearing. Although, Debbie has had a difficult time preparing for this hearing it is crucial we have a law in place that gives prisoners access to apply for parole. This is because society is judged on how they treat their prisoners. You are about to hear a portion of what Debbie had to say at the parole hearing of Paul Bernardo:

“Preparing for this parole hearing has been gut-wrenching for our family. We have to relive Leslie’s pain and horror — our pain and horror as if it happened yesterday. It is a nightmare. The pain, despair and anguish is crushing and debilitating. Preparing a victim statement after the passage of 27 years after Leslie’s murder is an excruciating process that again tears us apart. It is a deep and unrelenting pain. The healing we have worked so hard to achieve has been ripped apart, just like Leslie was by Bernardo. We find ourselves confronted with a very complex and excruciating dilemma; that is participating in the hearing or not participating. We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t. It is an emotional hell for us” (Debbie Mahaffy).

As you can probably tell this has deeply affected Debbie. She is angry that Paul did those awful things to her daughter and that she has to relive the experience again through his parole hearing. She does not think it is fair that her family has to relive all the horrible trauma of her daughters murder through the parole hearing, or that if they do not make a statement at the trial he could have a greater likeilhood of being considered for parole. This is something they consider when deciding whether a prisoner should get parole. In the following clip, you will hear Paul Bernardo express his explanations for why he murdered and raped those girls and his personal belief that he is better now since serving his sentence..

“I didn’t consider their (his victims’) emotions as much as, obviously, I should have, I offended to raise my self-esteem because when it was low, I felt terrible… I didn’t go out with the intent to hurt them, I did it for myself. It hurts. Because I did horrible things” (Paul Bernardo).

Bernardo denied being a sadistic psychopath, although he admitted he felt nothing for his victims at the time he committed his crimes. It was all a matter of asserting power and control in an effort to give his fragile ego a boost, he said. In the court, Paul Bernardo was eager, agreeable, strangely docile and inconsistent. He claimed to have discovered and confronted the psychological reasons for his sadistic sexual atrocities, including a series of rapes and murders of two teenage girls. He said they stemmed from low self-esteem, misguided coping mechanisms, “cognitive distortions” and the disinhibitory effects of stress and alcohol. Although he said all these things that seem remorseful his conduct did not display this emotion. He was slouched in his chair, without a care, quick to answer questions, and strayed from the topic, while talking for a long period of time. He spoke a lot on his life in prison and his effort of rehabilitation. His answers were thick with psychological jargon, focused on general behavioral patterns and theories rather than the extreme specific details of his inner life and his view of his crimes. In his speech, he used very academic words. His answers rarely seemed to satisfy the question, it was deviously evasive. Almost encouragingly, he nodded along with questions frequently, which is very unusual. Overall his speech did not match his own actions, which seems suspicious (Brean, Joseph).

Conclusions and questions

Parole is a law that we have to give deserving prisoners a chance to join the community in a safe way before their release. They have strict conditions and are supervised by a parole officer.

On 17 October 2018, Paul Bernardo was denied day and full parole. Although Paul Bernardo might feel as though he deserves parole, I do not see him getting parole in the foreseeable future. His criminal profile shows that he is a huge risk to society and there is virtually no way he could be managed in the community safely due to his previous manner of killing, his sexual assault history, the victim statements, and his lack of progress. He does not seem to have made any progress in court since he did not seem genuine in his words or like he had any remorse or emotion. He was very emotionless when stating how he cries all the time and feels awful for what he did. In that court, he seemed just as psychotic as ever showing such lack of emotion and remorse, he had not once apologized to the families for his actions. Bernardo could request parole in two years after the 2018 hearing. He has already spent 25 years of his life sentence in prison – most in solitary. Solitary has been known as a difficult thing for prisoners to experience, they often end up psychologically unstable due to the lack of human interaction. As well as, it is an indicator that he was not a well behaved prisoner. For these reasons I do not believe Paul Bernardo will ever be released into the community. What do you guys think? Do you think Bernardo has a chance of parole or do you think he will take his last breath in jail? Do you think it is unfair that families have to relive all the trauma all over again? Is the current parole system unfair to families of victims? Let us know by tweeting us @TheCriminallySound.