Amina Chaudhary, 45 is now out of prison on full parole. She was convicted of first-degree murder for strangling an 8 year old boy. The boy was the nephew of her Hindu lover that ended things with her when he went back to India to be married in an arranged marriage.
Amina was pregnant with the lovers child when he ended things. She was married and had another child with a husband that was also an arranged marriage.
She claimed to be innocent of this murder the entire time when She was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years.
Anees Chaudhary was convicted of first-degree murder and given a minimum of 25 years. He was convicted of the murder of a teenager Navneet Uppal. The teen was killed execution style. He was said to have killed the teen to avenge a friend's stabbing. His conviction was reduced to 2nd degree murder in an appeal and was eligible for parole in 14 years.
While in prison she heard about Anees Chaudhary through prison friends. The two were allowed to be married while in prison and each allowed
"conjugal" trailer visits. Through these visits they had 3 children, 1 boy and 2 girls.
The three children she had while in prison were raised by a lesbian couple. She paid $75 a month support out of her prison pay and he paid $200 a month from his limo job when he got out of prison.
She had a child from her first marriage and that child was raised by the father. The other child was put up for adoption.
Now the couple are doing well. He owns a limo business in Toronto and a farm. She owns a mortage free 3 bedroom townhouse, has two degrees and is working on her Master's.
She got out of prison last year and in October bought a townhouse for $163,133. The mortgage taken out on the home was $155,142. A week later the mortgage was paid in full.
She is now seeking to have her murder conviction overturned to avoid deportation. However having 3 Canadian children will make it unlikely she will be deported. She is trying to have it overturned because her conviction was based on circumstantial evidence and Dr. Charles Smith was the forensic pathologist on the case. His cases are being reviewed because of mistakes found while he worked at the Hospital for Sick Children. However her case was before that and right now they are not looking into cases he worked on prior to 1991.
The family of the 8 year old boy murdered is outraged saying "Allowing killers to have children together in our prisons is total insanity," This woman has shown not one ounce of remorse," "She has taken advantage of everything. With these kids, she gets certain perqs. The focus of the system became her kids, not on what she did and what she is. She's making a mockery of the whole justice system."
She was considered a low risk to the public. The parole board praised all her good work while in prison.
However since out of prison her husband has been a concern to the parole board. He has been involved in a number of offenses such as "inappropriate sexual remark" to a care-giver, inappropriate sexual interest in two girls and an apparent pass that left an 18-year-old limo passenger "petrified." and "scooping" limo fares at Pearson airport without a licence.
But the parole board said there have been no charges or illegal activity since an arson issue 5 years ago.
This case just boggles my mind. They were both in prison for murder. Yet they were allowed to get married having never met? How could they meet?
They were allowed to have sex and have children while in prison for murder.
Boy the pay in prison must be good to be able to pay off a mortgage one week after getting it even if they said extended family helped pay it off. She put down a sizeable downpayment.
He got enough money to buy a farm and open a limo business.
She has obtained degrees while in prison while others watched and cared for her children that she used to get perks in prison.
Something is totally wrong with our legal system. She lead a better life than a lot of people are able to live. She got degrees at the tax payers expense.