Justice committee  Our view is that the way prisons are currently used exacerbates the very conditions that led to most of those women being criminalized. So we would like to see alternatives to the way we currently imprison. So those who are dangerous and need to be separated need to have different types of separation.

Justice committee  As all the heads of corrections determined in the mid-nineties, 75% of those who are currently serving sentences could probably be in the community, being held accountable, and contributing in other ways. Then we would be able to focus on those who are truly causing grief in the community and what we could do differently.

Justice committee  Corrections say lifers are the easiest to manage and the least likely to pose challenges in the prison setting, so it would probably be based on their recommendations. The staff who work with them on a day-to-day basis say many of them could be in the community contributing, but for their sentence they cannot be.

Justice committee  In terms of the men who are in the system I know that many corrections people have similar views about men, not all of them but certainly some of them, depending on the context. Certainly the context in which many of the women I know who have been involved in the homicides are often very different from my experience when I worked with men.

Justice committee  Oh, I have the greatest respect for Sharon. I've known Ms. Rosenfeldt for 26 to 27 years. I respect the work she does and her tremendous efforts in her organization, which provides a lot of really important support and assistance to victims. With respect, though, if someone applies for a judicial review and it goes before the chief justice, it wouldn't involve the person going before the parole board.

Justice committee  Again, hypothetically, according to what the law says, it's possible, but I have yet to see that situation. Usually, the person wouldn't be supported and therefore they might not proceed, or they might be supported and proceed, but it usually wouldn't be every two years like that.

Justice committee  That would be my understanding.

Justice committee  No, because they would first have to go through the chief justice, then through the jury and have the jury agree to reduce the eligibility, then have the eligibility reduced. Then on whatever date the jury determined, the person would be eligible to apply to the parole board. But all of the paperwork and procedures would have to be followed in-between.

Justice committee  I'm not aware of any victims being involved in that stage of the application.

Justice committee  They could be involved there, but they could also be involved in the judicial review process.

Justice committee  Victims do appear or have appeared, either in person or through written statements, before the jury as well.

Justice committee  Of the ten women I've worked with, I would say about half of the victims have chosen not to come forward. That doesn't necessarily mean they're opposed or not opposed, although in some cases I have spoken to the victims and they've indicated they were not opposed but they also did not want to go and advocate on behalf of the individual.

Justice committee  They basically said they weren't happy with what had happened. They obviously didn't support the fact that the person had taken a life, and they talked about the anguish it had caused but also indicated they had some hope that the person would move on and do something productive with their life.

Justice committee  There's one family of victims who didn't say that initially, certainly didn't voice that at the judicial review, but at a recent parole hearing have. I have some opinions about why that may have happened, in terms of other interventions. Certainly nobody I know of has started, at the hearing, voicing those sorts of concerns.

Justice committee  That's my understanding of the way it reads. I could be wrong.