Cumulative Assignment PDF

Preview

Summary

Cumulative assignment...

Description

“Wilno Murders: Why Didn’t We Know?” From the Perspective of a Strain Theorist By: Leith Anstruther December 7th, 2020 CC-100

In terms of usage of the strain theory, this case is somewhat of a strange one, the outlying factor being that in this scenario and the events that led to it, Basil Borutski, the man guilty of the triple homicide that this documentary revolves around, was not belittled by our societal systems, as is often the case when using the strain theory in regards to criminals, he was in fact enabled by the Canadian Justice Systems lack of action to defend its endangered citizens. The strain theory states that society functions as an organism. If everything functions as it should, there will be harmony within the organism. On the other hand, if even one aspect of the organism fails to do its job, the rest will feel the strain of the dysfunction.

While this is the story of one man's appalling actions, it also highlights a gaping hole in the proceedings of the Canadian Justice System. Basil Borutski is clearly a disturbed man, it doesn’t take a psychiatrist to see that, and whilst he is clearly deserved of the sentence he has received, we must also take a look at the preventative systems that failed Nathalie Warmerdam, Anastasia Kuzyk, Carol Culleton and countless other women so gravely, because the bottom line is, yes, he committed the crimes he is charged with, but, he had been charged with assault as early as 1977, almost four decades before this massacre took place, with numerous reports of his abuse seemingly falling upon deaf ears.

The Canadian Justice System holds one rule higher than all else when dealing with court proceedings, “innocent until proven guilty”. The statement at its roots puts women, especially victims of abuse, at an unlawful disadvantage, as often the actions of a domestic abuser cannot be proven until they have already done significant visible damage to the victim, or in many cases much worse. In cases involving domestic abuse, cases where the perpetrator is more likely than not living in the same residence as the victim, the opportunity for the abuser to coerce, bully, or beat the victim into redacting statements they have made is monumental, and more significantly, seems to be completely overlooked by the authorities. The fact that these statements are so often illegitimized before a trial or even a hearing is reached should be enough of a red flag to the courts that there is something horribly wrong with our system, or at least that redacted statements should hold some sort of credibility for an abuse victim's defense, which they do not under Canadian law, especially in cases like that of Borutski, who had accumulated countless abuse allegations prior to the murders. Borutski, who disturbed or not, committed these crimes of aggression and found that he could simply continue this behaviour to avoid any sort of responsibility for his actions, was in fact enabled, if not unwittingly encouraged by the Canadian Justice System to continue this pattern of violence unscathed.

In a 26 year relationship with his now ex-wife, Mary Ann Mask, she charged Borutski four times with domestic abuse. Two of the charges were redacted by Mask pre-trial, and two of them were acquitted in court due to her backpedaling at the trials, out of fear of speaking out against him in his presence. There are also documented verbal claims that he attempted to push her from a moving vehicle and threatened to burn down her family home, which later did burn down, but no charges were ever filed. A year after moving in with Nathalie Warmerdam, he was arrested for threatening to skin her son and kill their family pet, he only spent 33 days in prison. The judge argued a lesser sentence for him, as he had no prior convictions. Later that year, he was arrested for the beating and choking of Anastasia Kuzyk, for which he was charged 17 months in jail. He was let out after 5 on account of good behaviour. On his release he was assigned one session of court mandated domestic violence counselling, for which he never showed up.

A key aspect of sociological positivism is reintegration, using positive environments, programs and influences to reintroduce an individual into society as a functioning member. The counselling, as astounding as it is that only one session was assigned, even more so that attendance wasn’t enforced, was at least a potential stepping stone to reformation, acknowledging his wrongdoings, however you’d like to word it, but instead, it was another ego boosting moment for

Borutski. The counsellor contacted his parole officer after the session, informing him that he hadn’t been in attendance, and never received a response.

If you look over the events that took place with an inquisitive eye, it is not difficult to see that time and time again, Borutski, as I’m sure is the case with many others guilty of abuse, domestic or otherwise, was not only enabled to repeat his actions, but was essentially shown that he was blameless in the situation, building a sort of god complex within them until it eventually boils over, as the events of September 22nd, 2015 sadly show. So again, yes, Basil Borutski is guilty in all senses for the crimes he committed, but is the system that enabled it really guiltless?...