A rehabilitation officer who worked with Basil Borutski while he was in prison warned his parole officer that she would have to be tough about enforcing Borutski’s parole conditions.
“It is my opinion that the victims are at risk with this individual,” said the rehabilitation officer’s email, read Thursday at an inquiry into the deaths of three women Borutski killed about nine months after he was released from prison. prison.
“It has been my experience with abusers like this that he doesn’t comply,” the email continued. “You will have to rape, rape, rape and rape him forever.”
“Violation” is a reference to the consequences for not adhering to parole conditions. The strongest consequence for offenders who flout the conditions is a violation of the probation charge. A conviction can lead to another arrest, according to the inquiry.
Borutski repeatedly tricked and manipulated police, probation officers and others in the justice system, but he was never charged with a probation violation, according to the inquiry.
Jamie Pearson, the parole and parole quality assurance manager for eastern Ontario, was on the witness stand for the third day Thursday in Pembroke.
Kirsten Mercer, a lawyer representing End Violence Against Women Renfrew County, asked Pearson if receiving this type of email would inform her judgment if Borutski started to “swing” on his probation conditions.
“I believe so,” replied Pearson, who was a probation officer for 11 years but was not a probation officer in this case.
Borutski was released from prison in January 2013 after serving less than 30 days. He had been convicted of threatening to strangle Nathalie Warmerdam’s son Adrian and kill a family pet.
On December 27, 2014, Borutski was released after serving 575 days in prison after beating and strangling Anastasia Kuzyk. In both cases, he was required to take the Partner Assault Response (PAR) counseling program to help stop the violent and controlling behavior.
On September 22, 2015, Borutski killed Warmerdam, Kuzyk and Carol Culleton.
In early December 2014, shortly before Borutski was released from prison after being convicted of attacking Kuzyk, Warmerdam considered applying for a protective order. She decided against it because she “didn’t want to return to the offender’s focus,” according to the parole officer’s case notes.
Warmerdam’s fear of antagonizing Borutski should have been a red flag, Mercer suggested to Pearson. He agreed, but, pressed by Mercer, admitted that the case notes showed no follow-up.
There were also questions raised in an internal review as to whether Borutski should have been considered an “intensive supervision offender,” which would have resulted in increased monitoring by his probation officer.
Pearson said he would classify this as a “threshold” case.
Failure to attend the PAR program would result in a violation of his probation, but Borutski had numerous and elaborate excuses for not attending, although he could attend other appointments, according to the inquiry.
Borutski often flouted his conditions and showed disdain for the justice system. At the start of the investigation, clinical psychologist Dr. Katreena Scott, an expert on violence against women, said loopholes in the system told abusers there would be no consequences for their actions.
Mercer asked Pearson at what point Borutski had been raped. Pearson said this would come after an ongoing pattern of non-compliance. Mercer responded that anyone listening to the inquiry or familiar with the case would have recognized that such a pattern clearly existed during Borutski’s two probation periods.
In May 2013, Warmerdam participated in a high-stakes case review with the police, the Crown and others involved in the case over concerns that Borutski wanted to move to Killaoe.
“Several people identified that they fought to keep him away from the area and now he has managed to get back,” Mercer said, adding that a police officer also flagged Borutski “fighting with the police.”
Although Borutski was under a court order not to be in Bonnechere Valley County, where Warmerdam’s farmhouse was located, he still appeared within the boundaries of his property, which stretched across the municipal boundary.
It looked like Borutski was trying to push the boundaries as far as he could and antagonize his victims, said Mercer, who noted that several people were concerned about Borutski’s decision to move.
Eventually, the court decided to allow Borutski to move out.
Warmerdam was worried that Borutski would attack if he couldn’t move, according to the inquiry.
In June 2013, while Borutski was awaiting a court date, he contested the need to move with his probation officer, but Warmerdam was not told that Borutski was angry, even though it could compromise his safety.
Borutski received an interview with the parole officer a month later. He missed the June 18, 2013 phone appointment. Under Mercer’s questioning, Pearson admitted that this could have been cause for concern.
Violations need to be taken seriously, said Lisa Oegema, founding executive director of Renfrew County Victim Services, as she outlined recommendations she wanted the jury to consider.
Victim Services staff often hear stories from victims and survivors about perpetrators who violated conditions but do not face difficult consequences, Oegema said.
“He entered his ex-partner’s house and assaulted her. He is charged with rape, but there is no prison sentence,” she said. “She’s afraid he’s coming back. He proved he can and there are no real consequences.”
Thursday was the last day for witnesses in the inquest. On Friday, the jury will hear the closing proposals. Deliberations are expected to continue on Monday, with a verdict and recommendations expected on Tuesday.