Comments on: Russell Williams’ final victim: his wife

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 31 May 2011 02:30:00 +0000

It’s interesting to note what the Macleans’ article leaves out : Mary Elizabeth Harriman’s behaviour AFTER her husband was found guilty by police. The woman is despicable – and weird to boot.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 31 May 2011 02:30:00 +0000

It’s interesting to note what the Macleans’ article leaves out : Mary Elizabeth Harriman’s behaviour AFTER her husband was found guilty by police. The woman is despicable – and weird to boot.

By: Wendy Kubik

Wendy Kubik — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:54:20 +0000

Theoretical sweetie, theoretical. Not theoretic. And what you missed has already been posted but you are in no mood to pay attention. You just want to spew hate. Well, you have to live with yourself.

By: Wendy Kubik

Wendy Kubik — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:50:14 +0000

Not so much mothers as fathers . . . and stepfathers. Doesn't mean women are perfect by any means but the majority of perpetrators in the area of sexual abuse within families are men. Women are equally guilty of emotional abuse which can be every bit as damaging as physical or sexual.

By: Guest B

Guest B — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:47:51 +0000

As his wife, she is certainly entitled to her half of the marital assets and does not owe her husband's victims any restitution. What bothers many people, however, is that she seesm to be getting not just her share of the marital assets but his as well – assets which could otherwise be seized to compensate his victims.
As for the floors – it seems to me that if your husband has just been arrested and charged with the most heinous crimes, a few scratches on your floor should the least of your concerns.

By: Judy

Judy — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:28:29 +0000

nah, they'll probably just plunk him down with those other 2 infamous men, Olson and Bernardo who, I have been led to understand, have their own private wing.

By: Judy

Judy — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:21:40 +0000

why would the rape victim think she should get anything in a civil suit, the province pays her bills and even compensates her if she feels she is not capable of work? why should she get any more than any of the other thousands of rape victims in Ontario? Oh, because the rapist is someone of notoriety whose wife has a little money? Again, that 'victim' now wants to victimize someone else who is equally victim to this man.

By: Judy

Judy — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:12:59 +0000

of course, the fact that she probably paid for the house herself, but had to have him on the mortgage agreement simply because legally they were married, doesn't mean a thing, does it? nor does the fact that she made more money than him or that SHE lived in the house, not him? That means nothing to people who think that a wife should be thrown out on the street because her husband ws a sociopaathic murderer. That must mean she was guilty too? guilt by association? She couldn't possibly be a victim, now could she? why, because he didn't beat her?

By: Jan

Jan — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 19:07:59 +0000

You seem to willfully misunderstand what people are saying, "Wealth Insider". What I am saying is this: Mary-Liz should not give up ANY of her own money, not one thin dime. She worked for it, it's hers. Half of everything they earned together is hers, too.

But IF she is divorcing that killer (about whom you claim she never had a clue) then HIS half/money should go to the victims, NOT to her. 50/50 of all marital assets is normal in every division of property in a divorce. Got that so far? And if their property was damaged as a result of his crime, then he owes her. Neither you, me, or his victims should pay for that damage, but we all did.

What I don't understand at all is why people like you think she should get his half, BEFORE his victims? Please explain that, it's really stumping people.

No, I wouldn't change places with the lofty, social-climbing Mary-Liz. I pity her lack of human compassion and dysfunctional dearth insight into her own life. And if you know anything about what real-life compensation courts award for crimes like this, you will know that what Mr & Mrs Williams offered his survivor was a vile insult added to her horrendous injuries.

By: HSW

HSW — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:16:23 +0000

How can you compare Ms. Harriman to Karla Homolka??? Homolka knew what her husband was and what he was doing and participated in his crimes. Ms. Harriman shares no blame with the monster that she married and does not deserve to lose her home and future security.

By: Healthcare Insider

Healthcare Insider — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:02:28 +0000

No, I do not work at Heart and Stroke. I am just raising possibilities that you people have not even considered. You have really no idea what Ms. Harriman's financial situation is. Maybe is weighed down by credit card debt. Are you sure there aren't mortgages on the property in Ottawa – secured lines of credit, etc. The point is that everyone is making assumptions without the full information of support them.

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:01:23 +0000

If you are a relative of Jessica Lloyd, my heart goes out to you and your family, and friends of your beautiful Jessica. It was a senseless act of a depraved individual. There are no words to describe that vile man.
The victims here are the women who were attacked, without provocation, violated, murdered, in cold blood, and coldly left. How horrific is that? And we are expected to view Ms. Harriman, in her new home, freshly replaced flooring, with her pension-sucking husband safely tucked away in prison, as a victim? It's disgusting.

By: Healthcare Insider

Healthcare Insider — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:55:51 +0000

Jan, my guess is "poor Mary-Liz" would change places with you in a heartbeat. My question is would you change places with her…given how she has benefitted so much. No, I didn't think so. She is now infamous through no fault of her own. Everything she believed to be true has turned out to be a lie. People are demanding that she offer the victims and they families compensation for her soon to be ex-husband's brutality. However, when she does so, people like you and Patchouli call her actions disgusting and say she is paying people to "shut up and go away".

By: HSW

HSW — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:52:42 +0000

Did we read the same article?? Ms. Harrisman did not participate in the article and is only the subject of the article. She has, understandably, not given any interviews. How is that "trying to gain sympathy"?

By: Healthcare Insider

Healthcare Insider — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:48:04 +0000

I already admitted I had it wrong.

By: jjm

jjm — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:31:34 +0000

Until you have lived in her shoes, you have no right to pass judgement on this woman. I do not know anybody who could cope with this situation. Lots of folks with spouses are truly upset when they discover the black side of his or her's personality. Her husband's dark side is very difficult to handle emotionally. Give her some deserved empathy.

By: Newsbum

Newsbum — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:00:03 +0000

Bottom line is he killed the young ladies, not his wife. She too is a victim and those trying to make it sound like she somehow approved of his actions are being foolish. She just cannot turn off the emotional taps and connection to him after so many years together. Like anyone of you could.

By: Guest

Guest — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:15:37 +0000

"Bizarre and insensitive" describe Mr and Mrs Williams, that's for sure. She can keep "her" money. But his money should pay restitution to the victims of his crimes, don't you think? That includes you and me, if you are an Ontario taxpayer. Because, rather than get her lamp and floors money from her husband, who, at the bottom of it all, is responsible for their damage, she wants you and me to pay for OUR police having damaged them! She's a piece of work, all right. She's last on the list of people I feel sorry for. And yes, I stopped giving the H&SF the $600 a year I'd been donating. And told them why. If they can afford to keep someone like her on, they're getting way too much money.

By: guest 45

guest 45 — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 01:53:30 +0000

What a bizarre, insensitive post. Can you imagine if YOUR spouse did something horrible. Wouldn't you want to make them pay? If you read you'd learn she's divorcing him. That money is hers. To say SHE should give her money implies she's guilty of something which is just not true. And what does where she works have anything to do with anything? Can you imagine the lawsuits if companies could fire people for what their RELATIVES did? So if your brother was a crook, you should be fired. Try some compassion.

By: guest

guest — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:50:42 +0000

I have absolutely no sympathy for Williams' wife. How petty can one woman be given the cruelty, horror & sorrow her husband caused. Her vulgar concern was not for the massive human destruction williams caused but for the scratches on her floor. She is nothing but a self-absorbed person who displays zero empathy. She and Williams were a very good match. The Heart & Stroke will never get another cent of my money as this is the kind of person they support.
She has never publicly expressed any regret to the victims' families her regret. She continues to visit him in jail in Kingston.

She wants privacy only because she has not separated herself from him…they are still a couple in her eyes. She'll never say a bad word about him…she's no victim!

By: aggie

aggie — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:36:24 +0000

I agree his money should go to the victims

By: aggie

aggie — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:32:59 +0000

I would like to see him serve a lot of time and then be put in with some cellmates, maybe they could serve better justice

By: aggie lloyd

aggie lloyd — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:27:57 +0000

and where did you find that military pension information.better check that one out again. get the facts

By: aggie lloyd

aggie lloyd — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:19:29 +0000

totally agree

By: aggie lloyd

aggie lloyd — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:18:11 +0000

ditto

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:02:50 +0000

This is the second comment that you have made without checking your facts.
He IS getting his pension. I suppose it isn't often that a retired base commander ends up in prison for murder, rape, child pornography, and breaking and entering. They haven't made an exemption clause for it., yet.

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:51:45 +0000

I read the entire article. I understood what was written. I feel that the article was more theoretic than factual regarding Ms. Harriman. What do you find shocking? What did the rest of us miss?

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:46:32 +0000

"The author Friscolani has written several articles on her here in MacLeans. I imagine he is working on a book about the whole hideous mess."
——————————————————————————————————-
Haven't we all had enough? There was an episode of Law and Order, shown this past week, which strongly mimicked this case. There was a commentary last weekend (W-five?). The book has been released. A news item was mentioned in the past day or so regarding keeping the divorce private. Enough!
It's like reliving the Paul Bernardo/Karla Homolka case – it went on for years.
The apparent megalomaniac (Williams) doesn't need more publicity, so that he can relish and relive his disgusting past deeds. And we don't need to hear about the innocent bystander Ms. Harriman, who must have been in a catatonic state while this was going on. What's next? An article about the cat?

By: Patchouli

Patchouli — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:06:40 +0000

The author Friscolani has written several articles on her here in MacLeans. I imagine he is working on a book about the whole hideous mess.

By: Fred

Fred — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:40:57 +0000

As usual I'm shocked at the amount of people that:
a) didn't read the article
b) didn't understand the article
c) have jumped to wild conclusions with little or no facts to back their theories
d) all of the above

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:04:41 +0000

" If she already owned an expensive home, she would get to keep more assets. "

I'm sorry, but that isn't correct, unless they had a premarital agreement. A good friend of mine married a woman who was on public assistance. He had a very good job and a home before he met her. After ten years of hell, for him, they were divorced. She got one-half of the value of the house, and other assets.

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:53:56 +0000

Seriously, was this article written by a friend/or friends of Ms. Harriman? She hasn't granted any interviews, so how could you know what she knew, how she feels, what she wants, or if she has any empathy for the victims and their families? She has worked very hard to distance herself from the creature Russell Williams, but doesn't mind retaining his money. Actions always speak louder than words.
I'm not impressed.

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:43:37 +0000

I don't support her-not at all. She has not said a word, publicly. If my husband had done such a thing, and I really knew nothing about his behavior, I would gather the press and announce my innocence and apologies to the families. The only thing she has done is to lay low and cover her financial assets. This is a warm, loving, intelligent, caring person? Not in my book.

By: MelaniAnne

MelaniAnne — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:37:45 +0000

"No one can say what they would or would not have done if they were Ms. Harriman." Agreed, however, this entire article is biased toward the angelic Ms. Harriman. How can the author/s possibly know what she knew, or didn't know since she hasn't made any public statements. The only communication that I've seen is her request to close her divorce proceedings and her medical file to the public. Curiously, one has to ask – her medical file? Was she seeing a therapist because of her relationship and her suspicions about her husband's odd behavior?
I don't know how many of you are married, but would it not strike you as odd when, instead of going to bed with his wife, the male half of this relationship would go jogging? There were, I believe, at least 1000 pieces of clothing – underwear, bathing suits etc. in boxes. During their move, and while their new home was being finished, most wives would ask about them. They weren't in a storage unit, but in their home. Are we expected to believe that Ms. Harriman saw no change in habits, behaviors, or acquisitions?
The emperor has no clothes!

By: marta

marta — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:14:15 +0000

the military does have alot of these types…as Russel….. it is a great place to hide /just like the Churches/ and still have a sheltered good life

By: Hope

Hope — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:14:19 +0000

She is no less of a monster than her loser husband. Arrogance seems to be the tie that bound these two idiots..one a murder the other one a self centered bit**

By: PFB

PFB — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 03:10:25 +0000

? this is not up to me to judge. Unfortunately she (his wife) will wear these scarlet letters (the MURDERERS wife) for the rest of her life.

By: Ello-Elle

Ello-Elle — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 01:51:52 +0000

2007 – All of a sudden – cancer … brain cancer maybe?

By: Ello-Elle

Ello-Elle — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 01:39:10 +0000

How much is your loved one worth before U start feeling better?

By: Guestnn

Guestnn — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:56:57 +0000

I've been reading about the origins of serial killers and rapists since this story started. And it's kind of shocking to me how everyone is fixating on Ms. Harriman when all the literature I can find – including by profiler Roy Hazelwood – asserts that almost all were severely abused – often sexually &/or psychologically terrorized – by female caregivers. Given that, why are we giving Ms. Harriman such a hard time, when no-one is writing about his parents?

From what I've read, unless we're in a 'Karla' situation, which I doubt, the research implicates mothers FAR more than wives.

By: Spitfire

Spitfire — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:03:22 +0000

He is still getting his pension

By: Guest

Guest — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:43:55 +0000

Bless you Page T. I am sorry that you were abused. You did not deserve it at all, you were just a wee child.
I hope you heal and that you continue to share with others the strength that got you to today. Take care.

By: Really?

Really? — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:09:21 +0000

Why should it go to the crown? If he died and left it to her in his will, it would be hers. In a divorce settlement it might be hers. Why should she have to settle for a lower socioeconomic status because of what he did? She's not charged and not guilty, and shouldn't have to pay.

By: Really?

Really? — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:03:46 +0000

I hope for your sake that no one close to you ever does anything wrong, or by your logic you can be left penniless and homeless.

By: Page Turner

Page Turner — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:36:43 +0000

This story has haunted me since it first came out. My family member is a retired leftenant colonel, he has lived in New Orleans for many years.He is cold, and always has been as cold as ice to me ( his and our brother's victim when I was a child). This man, who is revered by his collegues and friends, has now legally robbed me of my inheritance now my parents are gone, because I told the story of family abuse which included him( to no avail) when I promised I wouldnt to survive. There are many hidden monsters in the military. When issues arise, like these, they close ranks and blame and silence the victim whenever possible. The MP who drove me home, when he found me trying to escape from Camp Valcartier at age three, cried when I told him why, claiming (likely correctly) that he had no choice but to take me home, even though he had just heard the nightmare that was and would continue to be for me. I still have great affection for men in the armed forces in general. My father and grandfather lived dedicated honourable lives, therein. It is THIS generation, that is recruited based on bloodthirsty, heartless ambition ( and my brother proudly admits this IS the current criteria for military recruitment) that everyone should notice and insist on accountability and CHANGE!