There will still be people who defend him and other criminals on bail or conditional releases. They just never had a loved one murdered.
This is a bizarre comment.
Who is 'defending' someone who committed a murder? I count zero such people. Are there people defending the idea that you neither can, nor should jail people pre-emptively who have not been convicted of a crime without extraordinary cause and evidence? Sure. I'm one of them. I have no idea whether that applies in this case, as I have yet to see the evidence of what form of 'release' this person may have been on and will reserve judgement until I see it.
But the principle of innocent til proven guilty does matter, at least to me.
In respect of mental illness I believe we do need more long-term institutionalization of varying degrees (from fully secure to supportive housing in the community). I think the majority of people are there. Of course, putting aside that no statutory/regulatory regime will ever be perfect, one again, cannot and should not institutionalize, in a secure way (prison by any other name) someone who has yet to be seriously violent, or who had a one-off episode that medical professionals are confident they can and have addressed
Once again, we don't know what may apply to the circumstances of this case, and vague hearsay from 'The Sun' is not sufficient information on which to pass a thoughtful judgement.
No one wants murderers roaming the streets; it seems to be clear enough though this fellow had never committed one before; so he wasn't a murderer at the time of any release he may have been granted.
Was that release unwise in hindsight? Probably; but until we know the details of what options any judge or medical professional had before them and what evidence, its difficult to draw a definitive conclusion.
Edit to add: Do you know whose calling for more support for the mentally ill? The woman who just lost her child to murder at Keele Station:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...ew-ttc-fatal-stabbing-as-it-happens-1.6792936