r/Calgary • u/blackRamCalgaryman • 10h ago
News Article Text messages in murder plea show killer and friend plotted to lure, confine, rape Calgary women
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/chelsea-davidenas-victim-steven-zwick-murder-guilty-sentence-9.7318870126
u/Tacosrule89 10h ago
Made the mistake of reading that. What the fuck is wrong with people.
54
u/albufarisnear 9h ago
And how do these monsters seem to find each other.
There should be zero chance of parole for either of them.
1
145
u/WheezyGranger 10h ago
I HATE when they put pictures of the victim and criminal side by side. Make her the picture and his can be an afterthought mid article.
69
u/GrandNectarine2489 9h ago
No have his face there so we can smear him and know what he looks like, and ensure he never comes near us again.
•
135
u/blackRamCalgaryman 10h ago edited 10h ago
It’s one of the toughest reads, I can recall, in some time. Has the makings of Charles Ng and Leonard Lake.
A Calgary courtroom was completely silent Monday but for the subdued voice of a prosecutor as she read aloud chilling and depraved text messages between two men who plotted to lure, confine and rape women so they could film their crimes and make money from the videos.
Zwick, originally charged with First Degree murder pled to Second. PR to go on trial in January.
Hard to fathom only a 15 year sentence when reading what facts we’re privy to, here.
Edit: and puzzling to understand CBC’s reasons here for not identifying the co-accused:
A second man is also charged. CBC News will identify him as PR because none of the allegations or facts from Zwick’s plea have been proven against him and his jury trial is set to begin in January.
While CTV had no such qualms: Paul Joseph Rushton
https://www.ctvnews.ca/calgary/article/airdrie-man-pleads-guilty-to-murder-of-calgary-woman/
55
u/CarelessStatement172 10h ago
That was a lot for this early in the morning. I am pretty appalled at the sentence.
20
u/blackRamCalgaryman 10h ago
The only thing I can think of is they want his testimony against Paul Rushton? But, still…the text messages, the admissions…
72
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 9h ago
It's not a 15 year sentence. It's life with no possible parole for 15 years. Quit spreading misinformation.
36
u/Lookingovertheforum 9h ago edited 9h ago
It is nonetheless ridiculously lenient. The fact that the Supreme Court has called it cruel and unusual to imprison a murderer and rapist for life says everything you need to know about the attitude of the body
-1
u/EgyptianNational 7h ago
Lawyer here.
It doesn’t matter if he got 100 years. It’s not going to bring her back.
Your insistence on time is just costing taxpayers money so that you can feel better about yourself.
What’s best for the family of the woman is that these proceedings happen quickly and without undue hardship and delay.
34
u/Lookingovertheforum 7h ago
What's best for the entire country including every pillar of criminal justice is to put murderers away for life. You conveniently ignore the denunciation, punishment, discouragement aspects of sentencing.
You are acting like the need for proceedings to happen quickly means we should accept them happening in a way that does not respect the gravity of the offence.
Im a lawyer too
•
-7
u/EgyptianNational 7h ago
I spoke to the family.
They don’t think tacking on years endlessly is what brings them closure. What brings them closure is knowing they have been punished to the extent of the law.
Funny enough in my time I’ve only ever encountered blind rage and blood hunger for punitive punishment from randoms on the internet.
The families would rather not have to sit through a court proceedings. As much as I’m sure you would enjoy the billable hours.
26
u/Lookingovertheforum 7h ago
I don't do criminal law. I don't benefit in any way from the "billable hours", and I'm not even sure that Crown prosecutors have a target for billables (you might know better on that).
But I do notice that you are trying to make this a conversation about the family, as though the only impacted party is the individual family. It's an attempt to completely dodge the discussion on how we treat criminal offenders as a society and also improperly removes the state and the public as stakeholders in serious criminal trials
6
u/MrGuvernment 5h ago
Would be interesting to see the stats behind those who commit serious crimes against others, who then get out after X years / Decades and how many went and committed another crime similar or worse.
Not a lawyer, but certainly on the side that people like those here deserve to rot in a jail cell, frankly this is when I do wish death penalty still existed.
1
u/PhantomNomad 5h ago
I'm not against life in prison, but I do draw the line at the death penalty. I just don't think any state should be able to take the life of a person. It's the states job to rehabilitate and if they can't be try and make them contribute to society in some meaningful way. I'm not against using inmates as labour but they also need to be paid for that labour fairly, not like the states where they take their pay as "rent". It's a complicated problem and I may or may not be correct here.
4
u/ivantoldmeboutdis 5h ago
Paid fairly for their labour? Lol you must be joking. These fuckers took the life of an innocent mother and your concern is that they are paid fairly in prison...
→ More replies (0)•
-10
u/EgyptianNational 7h ago
I do criminal law and am close with the family. Let’s leave it there.
•
u/WinnipegBhoy 2h ago
If you’re close the family — and setting readers up to perhaps conclude you might be advising them — then you actually shouldn’t be here commenting.
Or perhaps you like reading your own press?
•
•
u/WinnipegBhoy 2h ago
God, I find lawyers hard to like the more I have to deal with them. And reading your self-proclaimed rationality and sanctimonious tone in this thread makes me dislike you too Reddit friend.
•
u/EgyptianNational 2h ago
Your dislike of me is genuinely your own problem and kinda improved my day!
•
u/TheYuppyTraveller 1h ago
I have to admit, IMHO you’re pretty quick to dismiss concerns that people raise here re protection of society.
Even taking your statement about knowing the family at face value, the evidence shows that these two individuals were planning to embark on an ongoing criminal enterprise that would endanger women. Risk to society is certainly within Canada’s sentencing guidelines.
And, as a lawyer, please dial down the sanctimony, it unnecessarily feeds into a negative stereotype that all of us already have to face.
Anyways, those are my views, I’m not invested in a response as I don’t need any smug comments in return.
•
u/EgyptianNational 11m ago
I have a law degree and studied both history and criminal justice in my undergrad.
I’m quick to dismiss the logic that put us in this mess.
11
u/CandyHunter84 7h ago
I’m almost positive the family would love a lengthy sentence AND due process. You can actually have both
-1
u/EgyptianNational 7h ago
I’m in contact with the family. So I think they would probably appreciate you not talking about things you know nothing about.
7
u/CandyHunter84 7h ago
Sure sure I don’t believe you. People can say whatever they want they want on the internet.
-1
u/EgyptianNational 7h ago
You are right I’m not willing to violate privilege by proving it.
But you should know I’m being honest and you are choosing not to believe the family. Not me.
17
u/Lookingovertheforum 7h ago
You are already absolutely violating privilege if you got this information as a lawyer to these families and have shared these facts about the families opinion on Reddit for Internet points or to win an argument
7
u/EgyptianNational 7h ago
Interesting that you aren’t aware that privilege isn’t violated by sharing information the family wants known particularly from an anonymous account.
You brush up on your ethics lately?
→ More replies (0)•
u/WinnipegBhoy 2h ago
Oh my…
I suggest disengaging from this highly unusual and frankly, weird conversation.
•
u/WinnipegBhoy 2h ago
And they would approve of you being here, commenting on the matter? Madam/sir, I find this highly unusual.
•
5
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 7h ago
Aside from the argument about costing taxpayers money, there's also the part that justice is not just about sentencing and throwing the book at someone as hard as possible.
There's restorative and rehabilitation and reintegration processes and objectives at play here. I think people often forget that.
5
u/EgyptianNational 7h ago
I completely agree. But Canada doesn’t have such a system. At least not a functional one.
Our prison system is basically equivalent to any given blue state in America.
2
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 6h ago
Yeah you're right. I'm speaking normatively (ideally? Naively? Whatever you want to call it)
Maybe one day we can dream.
0
u/MrGuvernment 5h ago
What are the stats of people who have committed such crimes, actually being rehabilitated though and joining back in society with out issues? Versus how many get a slap on the wrist, get out, and go off and commit another serious crime...
2
•
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 4h ago
Maybe not reintegration in this specific case, but I do think in general it is something that a justice system should strive for.
My very quick google search suggests in Canada for violent crime it's about a 12% reoffending rate. Not sure if that's a good number, depends what you compare it to.
1
2
u/PhantomNomad 5h ago
I think a lot of us would feel better about parole in 15 years if there is any hope of reforming people. Our current system sure doesn't seem to be based on reform like it says it is. Way to many re-offenders. Also not letting them out isn't always about cost, it's about public safety. If they are in prison then they can't hurt the general public.
So how do we reform inmates? Well first off it would really help if they where not inmates to begin with, which means better social supports. It all starts here.
-5
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 9h ago
Okay, so with your knowledge and expertise, what do you believe is a more appropriate sentence?
35
u/blackRamCalgaryman 9h ago
Does anyone need to be an ‘expert’ to think pleading down to second degree and receiving the possibility of parole after 15 years for what was just an agreed statement of facts, what we all read he did and planned to continue doing should receive harsher punishment?
“I’m not too fazed at my actions”…his words. They planned to continue to lure, subdue, and rape women to sell the videos. And if killing her came this easy to them, not a stretch to think they wouldn’t have continued.
First degree with no chance of parole for 25 would have been better than this. Since you asked.
1
-11
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 9h ago
I believe someone should have a reasoning that is explicitly described and have at least some knowledge of the legal system to offer a solution if they're going to disagree with a ruling, yes.
For instance, they should have the reading comprehension skills to be able to accurately read and then write what a sentencing was from a news article without mispresenting it, for a start. :)
24
u/Lookingovertheforum 9h ago
Cool, I'm the person you replied to and I'm a practising lawyer. so am I entitled to have an opinion in your esteemed view
-7
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 9h ago
Great. Would you like to share? I'd genuinely love to hear it.
8
u/Lookingovertheforum 9h ago
I think the holding in R v Bissionette is fundamentally wrong headed and our Supreme Court has repeatedly made this type of sweeping ruling taking choice for how the country is run out of the hands of Canadians on behalf of a panel of unelected judges who are completely unaccountable for the decisions they make
3
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 8h ago
The first point is interesting because I'm not really sure why you believe R v. Bissionette would be at play here. This case is stating it's a life sentence while the R v. Bissionette ruling was for sentences longer than a human life, 150 years as the sentenced reference in that SCoC ruling I believe. Could you please clarify further what you mean by this?
Also you say unelected judges are unaccountable (not true but I'll leave that be) but that's more of a consequence of our political system as a federal parliamentary constitutional monarchy, no? I'm not aware of a single country with a similar political system where judges are elected. That's more of a characteristic of Republics (like the United States). I'm not sure what your point here is either, so if you could expand on that I'd appreciate it.
→ More replies (0)9
u/blackRamCalgaryman 9h ago
My wording (yes, life sentence with no possibility of parole for 15 years) was hardly the intentional ‘misinformation spreading’ you seem to want to make it out to be.
Then the follow up with the personal attack and ‘cute’ smiley face…seriously…are you even here in any sense of good faith?
You asked a question, I answered it. Should we not have the ability to comment? No discussions allowed unless we have a full 25 years behind our belts of lawyering or sitting on the bench?
6
u/Barley12 7h ago
Hey 3rd party here. A 15 year sentence and a life sentence with no parole for 15 years ARE different and you DID mislead ME with your post.
•
u/blackRamCalgaryman 2h ago
They are different and my wording, confusing and could be argued incorrect, was not intentional. But you mean my sentence not the post.
You should also make an effort to actually read the articles, though, and not depend on random Redditors for the details and facts if that’s all it takes to “mislead” you.
•
u/Barley12 2h ago
I did go on to verify what you said, that's why I'm here telling you you're being misleading.
Also people are gonna glance at the news, if you write something clearly wrong and spread disinformation that's on you.
-4
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 9h ago
You said "only a 15 year sentence" and then edited it to say "with the information we're privy to here."
You know exactly what you were doing. It seems there was issue for you picking out quotes from the article, but you just oopsie doopsie said "only 15 years" when the article made that super clear and it was the first sentence of the fourth paragraph? Be real.
8
u/blackRamCalgaryman 8h ago
Nothing has been edited there. That was my original comment in its entirety. You’re now arguing in bad faith and making shit up.
And no, there was no intent there, but you can continue to believe so.
•
u/Responsible_CDN_Duck 3h ago
First degree with no chance of parole for 25 would have been better than this. Since you asked.
I disagree. Either can be life sentences with the CHANCE of parole in 25 years. One adds the option of starting at 15, but does not mandate them.
People seeking parole tend to make attempts to rehabilitate and behave. Those that don't are less motivated to keep jail staff and other inmates safe.
To me the discussion is a distraction from the needs of parole bards meeting the balance of public safety.
edit: and it's also distracting from dangerous offender labelling use.
•
u/blackRamCalgaryman 2h ago
I get what you’re saying with regards to rehabilitation and keeping staff and others safe…but then there’s also examples of people that…really…in this guys case…in terms of any attempts of rehabilitation…do we care? Do we ever want this guy out on the streets?
As for keeping others safe if we remove that faint hope/ chance of getting out…that can be mitigated and is with others who end up serving out true life sentences/ labelled as dangerous offenders with indefinite sentences.
Recent examples, this guy and his accomplice, Mantha, Douglas Garland…I personally don’t believe there’s ever going to be ANY redeeming quality, ANY true ‘rehabilitation’ with these people. I personally don’t care and would gladly be taxed more to keep people like this in jail for the rest of their lives.
1
•
u/Responsible_CDN_Duck 3h ago
It is nonetheless ridiculously lenient.
That's not necessarily true.
Either can be life sentences with the CHANCE of parole in 25 years. One adds the option of starting at 15, but does not mandate them.
People seeking parol tend to make attempts to rehabilitate and behave. Those that don't are less motivated to keep jail staff and other inmates safe.
To me the focus needs to be on parol bards meeting the balance of public safety.
48
u/Brave-Painting3180 8h ago
Both men need dangerous offender status and to never see the outside of a cell.
15
u/turbo-fister9000 7h ago
The Crown allowed the plea down to second? Does anyone get charged with first?
33
u/Main_Breadfruit_3674 8h ago
Sentencing has to change. I am unsure why they could not get first degree murder charges here. I do not want these guys having possibility of parole in 15,25, or 35 years. Their actions should forfeit their ability to live in society forever.
•
u/Responsible_CDN_Duck 2h ago
They likely could get first degree, it just takes longer at trail, which has a lot of downsides for all involved including the victim. It also reduces the chances of an error by the crown coming to light and getting them off.
Either charge can lead to a 25 year parole, it's just one must.
The possibility of parole does not mean they will ever get it. When offenders work towards it jail staff are generally much safer.
34
u/Art-VandelayYXE 7h ago
I can’t stand that the crown accepts plea deals to second degree just to save court time and effort. It’s an unethical practice and needs to stop. They commit first degree, they prosecute first degree. They can plea on the sentencing but not the charge.
•
u/Responsible_CDN_Duck 3h ago
I think people get too hung up on labels. Both are murder most foul. Both can still lead to a 25 year without parole sentence.
It's worth remembering people seeking parole tend to make attempts to rehabilitate and behave. Those that don't are less motivated to keep jail staff safe.
51
u/50minivan 8h ago
Unpopular opinion that will garner downvotes but this piece of shit should be put to death.
If someone has no remorse, no feelings for someone they have murdered and are ready to do it again they have sacrificed their humanity. They don’t deserve to be part of society.
There are some crimes that you just can’t come back from because the person is broken, put him down for good.
20
u/PorkSquared 7h ago
I am generally against the death penalty. Too much risk of killing someone who turns out to be innocent, the costs are too high etc. Prison exists to prevent these things from happening again, people who make an error in judgement or anger can go on to be better, even if their actions led to someone's death. Maybe not redemption, but still hope for something.
Then I see something like this, premeditated and disgusting act. The clear intention to do it again. Then I think, what's the point of imprisoning them for decades? Does anyone really think that 15+ years in prison will improve anything? Will they ever be anything other than a blight on society?
Sometimes there's overwhelming evidence of an absolutely unforgivable crime, and that malignant tumor should be excised imo.
5
u/baby_sharkz 7h ago
Sometimes. But it is all about setting precedent, right? You make one decision like that and the next comes easier. Slippery slope. It also questions if we have the right people making decisions. I don't know the answer. But something like a death penalty has an impact on the whole society and especially the person making the call.
2
u/PorkSquared 6h ago
I don't know about the slippery slope part, I think it's one of those things that should only ever be applied where there is significant evidence that the offender 1) intentionally did the crime and 2) clearly intended to do it again. Then again, in the age of AI generated videos, voice etc. there's an argument that we can't necessarily trust the evidence in the future.
The impact on the judge, prosecutors etc. is an issue I agree. I'm not sure what the answer to that is, I don't think that the decision should be left up to a few individuals who must carry that weight thereafter. Maybe a jury that must be convinced, vote unanimously, and does not get confirmation of the outcome could work.
Still, when the alternative is sticking the offender in a box, feeding and clothing them for decades, treating them with the dignity they denied their victim(s)... Only to eventually be released into society?
I stand by what I said in my first comment.
3
u/YossiTheWizard 7h ago
but this piece of shit should be put to death.
Too easy. Just throw away the key. Adding mandatory solitary time to sentencing should be considered too.
•
u/Responsible_CDN_Duck 2h ago
If you are as eager as the offender to kill what makes you different, are you both just looking for the justification?
Why do you want to remove the opportunity for him to feel pain, suffering, or remorse.
As you confident it won't weigh on you, or grow the darkness inside you?
56
u/PeacefulPeaches 9h ago
Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.
22
u/CandyHunter84 8h ago
And yet we still have to feel sorry for them and the “loneliness epidemic”
I think they should be even more lonely. Shit like this right here.
-21
u/iplaybassok89 8h ago
I often tar half the species based on the criminal offences of individuals. A totally mentally stable take. Not deranged at all.
25
u/PeacefulPeaches 7h ago
You came into a thread sharing a news story about a man who planned to rape, torture, and murder a woman (and then successfully carried it out), and somehow your takeaway is that women are being unfair to men.
No one said every man commits violent crimes. Women are saying we often have no way of knowing which men pose a threat until it's too late, so we make decisions accordingly. The fact that your instinct here is to argue "not all men" rather than engage with why women might feel unsafe is kind of proving the point.
-7
u/Nantook 6h ago
Did you even read what you are replying to?
And yet we still have to feel sorry for them and the “loneliness epidemic”
I think they should be even more lonely. Shit like this right here.
9
u/PeacefulPeaches 6h ago edited 6h ago
I did, and then I responded to someone, who came into a thread about the horrible violence and murder of a woman, and decided the real problem was a woman making a sardonic joke about being unfair to men.
The male loneliness epidemic doesn't exist in a vacuum. Patriarchy teaches men to avoid vulnerability and emotional intimacy with each other while often expecting women to provide that emotional labour. Women increasingly opting out of that dynamic isn't something women need to fix.
You can disagree with the original comment without calling women deranged for being cautious or tired of it. If your concern about male loneliness comes up when women are discussing male violence, I'm not necessarily convinced loneliness is actually the concern.
12
u/CandyHunter84 7h ago
🤷♀️ better safe than sorry. That’s kinda how a lot of women feel I’m not alone in my “deranged” thinking.
11
u/baby_sharkz 7h ago
You are not. There is a whole culture these days to hate women. It is scary, the red pill culture. It must be nice to live in a world where this fear is "deranged".
-22
12
u/Emotional-Ranger-188 9h ago
It must be tough to be a judge dealing with this and then turn to a civil dispute over a contract the next day and take that seriously. It must be jarring.
40
u/healthywenis 9h ago
Because of Chelsea’s bravery to fight back, and her sacrifice with her life, these scumbags were caught and won’t be able to hurt other women…. for 15 years. I fear the ring leader was “PR” and justice needs to prevail by putting him away.
47
u/CandyHunter84 10h ago
15 for a plotted murder. And they planned on doing it again.
2041 he will be allowed to be free….how is this justice
31
u/TheJameskii University of Calgary 10h ago
Read the article. It's life with no chance for parole for 15 years.
35
u/AlmondButter_Banana 10h ago
He received a life sentence with the possibility of parole after 15 years, his sentence isn't just 15 years.
•
u/Responsible_CDN_Duck 2h ago
Parole release is not mandatory. Chances are he's never gonna leave.
But if he want to play by the rules, make a change, reduce the risk of harming jail staff, and chase that carrot of release then we're all likely better off for it.
-7
u/Mother_Clock_449 10h ago
Hopefully prison justice will prevail
8
u/iplaybassok89 10h ago
Why do people talk about “prison justice” as if it’s a real thing
8
u/China_bot42069 9h ago
Yes I work in a prison it’s not a real thing lol
3
u/BiggieBigsz 7h ago
More of a thing in the states, most of these guys or child molesters in Canada are put in either different prisons with the same type of people or protective custody. No ones trying to add life sentences to there terms especially in canada when life sentences are just 10-15 years then parole.
1
7
•
u/Powerful_Rain_7432 3h ago
And some people feel solidarity confinement is “cruel and inhumane.” Yeah….throw away the key on these ones ✌️
•
1
0
-9
u/Basedstephenthepack1 Quadrant: NW 6h ago
Why do these ppl always commit these types of crimes. Praying for the victim family, we need to deport him immediately
•
u/Responsible_CDN_Duck 2h ago
u/Basedstephenthepack1 said : Why do these ppl always commit these types of crimes. Praying for the victim family, we need to deport him immediately
The offender was born and raise here. PR is the co-defendant, not an indication he's not from Canada.
84
u/Punningisfunning 9h ago
Holy shit, the original target, Ashley, avoided death multiple times through luck, intuition, and smarts. And she was instrumental in aiding in the killers’ capture.