'Fury said to a
mouse, That he
met in the
house,
"Let us
both go to
law: I will
prosecute
YOU.—Come,
I'll take no
denial; We
must have a
trial: For
really this
morning I've
nothing
to do."
Said the
mouse to the
cur, "Such
a trial,
dear Sir,
With
no jury
or judge,
would be
wasting
our
breath."
"I'll be
judge, I'll
be jury,"
Said
cunning
old Fury:
"I'll
try the
whole
cause,
and
condemn
you
to
death."'
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Nazis
Listening to some of the media earlier today you'd think Hitler was running for Parliament. The American overuse of Nazi has come to Canada.
I may live to regret this Post (see it in an attack ad one day!) but let's stop and think for a moment.
Are the Nazis remembered as the model of evil because they (1) banned smoking in public (2) had full time Party activists located in each major electoral district or (3) killed people because they disliked their ethnic background?
The question is rhetorical.
A lot of Nazi policy was pretty standard big government stuff. And their Party constitution (absent the Führerprinzip) was ordinary enough.
The Nazis were evil because they put a value on a human life (and a pretty low or even negative value) depending on race, origin or politics. They were content to kill for reasons that were wrong -- politics and ethnicity. The Nazis were not evil because they were highly organised or believed in Big Government.
It may be that Big Government and highly organised political parties are bad but if they are it's not because of Hitler.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
I may live to regret this Post (see it in an attack ad one day!) but let's stop and think for a moment.
Are the Nazis remembered as the model of evil because they (1) banned smoking in public (2) had full time Party activists located in each major electoral district or (3) killed people because they disliked their ethnic background?
The question is rhetorical.
A lot of Nazi policy was pretty standard big government stuff. And their Party constitution (absent the Führerprinzip) was ordinary enough.
The Nazis were evil because they put a value on a human life (and a pretty low or even negative value) depending on race, origin or politics. They were content to kill for reasons that were wrong -- politics and ethnicity. The Nazis were not evil because they were highly organised or believed in Big Government.
It may be that Big Government and highly organised political parties are bad but if they are it's not because of Hitler.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Street kids in Iqaluit -- context counts
There is a mild media uproar about two ten year old boys seen sleeping on the street in Iqaluit.
You don't need context to see that's terrible -- forget the age, no one should be sleeping on the street anywhere, let alone the far north.
And it's true Iqaluit has serious social issues -- a suicide rate eleven times the national average and a rate of violent crime that makes the worst parts of our worst cities look tame (there are three full time judges for a total population the size of Pembroke).
But still, why were the boys on the street? Poverty? Being thrown out of their house? Or something else?
It seems "something else". One of the boys is a regular runaway (now that begs the question why? Abuse or "something else"). It doesn't seem these kids were on the street because of poverty or being thrown out of their homes.
That means the problem (while it may reflect a wider social breakdown) is likely to be found in a single home which needs intervention.
Context is everything.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
You don't need context to see that's terrible -- forget the age, no one should be sleeping on the street anywhere, let alone the far north.
And it's true Iqaluit has serious social issues -- a suicide rate eleven times the national average and a rate of violent crime that makes the worst parts of our worst cities look tame (there are three full time judges for a total population the size of Pembroke).
But still, why were the boys on the street? Poverty? Being thrown out of their house? Or something else?
It seems "something else". One of the boys is a regular runaway (now that begs the question why? Abuse or "something else"). It doesn't seem these kids were on the street because of poverty or being thrown out of their homes.
That means the problem (while it may reflect a wider social breakdown) is likely to be found in a single home which needs intervention.
Context is everything.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Friday, August 14, 2009
The Khadr decision
The question before the Federal Court of Appeal was whether judges ought to be ruling on an area of foreign policy. The majority said they could and should because the matter was not one of mere policy -- Canada had acted. The dissent said the Court should keep hands off.
Because there is a dissent there is a much higher chance of an appeal to the Supreme Court -- that will take a year to 18 months.
In their majority ruling, Justices John Evans and Karen Sharlow said Canada must act because Canadian officials violated Mr. Khadr's Charter rights by interrogating him at Guantanamo while he was under duress and then sharing that information with the Americans.
"While Canada may have preferred to stand by and let the proceedings against Mr. Khadr in the United States run their course, the violation of his Charter rights by Canadian officials has removed that option," their decision states.
"The knowing involvement of Canadian officials in the mistreatment of Mr. Khadr in breach of international human rights law, in particular by interviewing him knowing that he had been deprived of sleep in order to induce him to talk, 'opens up a different dimension' of a constitutional and justiciable nature," they wrote.
Mr. Justice Marc Nadon dissented from his two colleagues' position. He agreed with the government's view that the courts should not be deciding whether Canada should request Mr. Khadr's repatriation.
"It is up to Canada, in the exercise of its powers over foreign policy to determine the most appropriate course of action in dealing with the US with regard to Mr. Khadr's situation," he wrote in a dissenting judgment
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Because there is a dissent there is a much higher chance of an appeal to the Supreme Court -- that will take a year to 18 months.
In their majority ruling, Justices John Evans and Karen Sharlow said Canada must act because Canadian officials violated Mr. Khadr's Charter rights by interrogating him at Guantanamo while he was under duress and then sharing that information with the Americans.
"While Canada may have preferred to stand by and let the proceedings against Mr. Khadr in the United States run their course, the violation of his Charter rights by Canadian officials has removed that option," their decision states.
"The knowing involvement of Canadian officials in the mistreatment of Mr. Khadr in breach of international human rights law, in particular by interviewing him knowing that he had been deprived of sleep in order to induce him to talk, 'opens up a different dimension' of a constitutional and justiciable nature," they wrote.
Mr. Justice Marc Nadon dissented from his two colleagues' position. He agreed with the government's view that the courts should not be deciding whether Canada should request Mr. Khadr's repatriation.
"It is up to Canada, in the exercise of its powers over foreign policy to determine the most appropriate course of action in dealing with the US with regard to Mr. Khadr's situation," he wrote in a dissenting judgment
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Outsourcing of records to foreign jurisdictions
Today's decision in Mathieson v. Scotia (unrep Master Abrams) is of considerably more importance than might at first appear.
The defendant, a major Canadian financial institution, outsourced the storage of its electronic documents to a company in foreign country. As a result, it was not possible to summons a witness from the document storage company to give trial evidence regarding the storage and searches of those documents. The plaintiff sought such evidence for trial and required examination via commission of employees of the foreign company. The defendant objected strongly.
Master Abrams allowed the commission stating:
The issues now to be explored cannot be explored with the defendant's own representatives, given the outsourcing of the defendant's archival of electronic records to a
Had the Master not allowed the examination, companies with foreign outsourcing might not be subject to the same production as companies maintaining re cords in Ontario.
Khadr appeal dismissed -- Crown must press for his release
The Federal Court of Appeal has upheld a judge’s ruling that ordered the federal government to press for the return of Omar Khadr from a U.S. military detention centre in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The Toronto-born Khadr, now 22, is being held at Guantanamo and is accused of killing a U.S. army soldier with a hand grenade during a gunfight in Afghanistan in 2002, when Khadr was 15. His case remains on hold pending a review of the U.S. military tribunal system by the Obama administration.
The Toronto-born Khadr, now 22, is being held at Guantanamo and is accused of killing a U.S. army soldier with a hand grenade during a gunfight in Afghanistan in 2002, when Khadr was 15. His case remains on hold pending a review of the U.S. military tribunal system by the Obama administration.
St Maximilian Kolbe
Today is the Feast day of St Maximilian Kolbe patron saint of both drug addicts and journalists.
Phoney authors
Today's papers speak of medical journal articles that list authors who had nothing to do with the papers they are supposed to have co-written.
This is said to be a problem because the co-authors give credibility to weak papers.
I'm not sure about the credibility argument but regardless the problem is not new.
While working on an MSc in Astrophysics nearly 30 years ago I wrote a paper on a star. I had a co-author who did lots of work and arranged for publication. The paper came out in a prestigious journal and my co-author and I were the first of ... five authors!!!
Who were the last three?
People who arranged funding or helped get the paper printed.
I was a little surprised but accepted the situation as normal -- besides, all I cared about was getting the paper published. Perhaps today I would have made a stink but I was very young and accepted what I was told.
But I suppose there are three (older now) academics with resumes listing a paper in which they had no actual input.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
This is said to be a problem because the co-authors give credibility to weak papers.
I'm not sure about the credibility argument but regardless the problem is not new.
While working on an MSc in Astrophysics nearly 30 years ago I wrote a paper on a star. I had a co-author who did lots of work and arranged for publication. The paper came out in a prestigious journal and my co-author and I were the first of ... five authors!!!
Who were the last three?
People who arranged funding or helped get the paper printed.
I was a little surprised but accepted the situation as normal -- besides, all I cared about was getting the paper published. Perhaps today I would have made a stink but I was very young and accepted what I was told.
But I suppose there are three (older now) academics with resumes listing a paper in which they had no actual input.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
What is parole?
In criminal justice systems, parole is the supervised release of a prisoner before the completion of his/her sentence.
Parolees are still considered to be serving their sentences, and may be returned to prison if they violate the conditions of their parole.
Conditions of parole often include things such as obeying the law, refraining from drug and alcohol use, avoiding contact with the parolee's victims, obtaining employment, and maintaining required contacts with a parole officer.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Thursday, August 13, 2009
In this case, yes, we need more police
The incoherence on 'white collar crime' is amazing.
Last week the Conservatives suggested that getting rid of conditional sentences would be enough. Now, see story below, they want to fiddle with the parole system.
Surely the Minister of Justice is aware that day release from the Federal system is not determined by the sentencing judge but rather by the Federal Parole Board? So sentencing guidelines are irrelevant. Change the parole guidelines if you wish but judges -- save in some homicide cases and long term offender cases -- have no input on parole.
But let's overlook the legal structures as to who releases. Let's see what could have a limiting effect on fraud.
White collar crime -- unlike virtually all other crime -- is largely rational. So it can be deterred. But what deters is (mainly) not a longer sentence but rather the likelihood of detection and arrest.
So, here, more police makes very good sense. If we increase the level of funding and expertise of fraud squads across the country (making no change at all in the statute law) there will be a real and immediate decline in white collar crime.
Normally I suggest a "law and order" agenda is misguided. In this case, more police and resources makes sense. What doesn't make sense is ad hoc plans to tinker.
Ottawa vows crackdown on white-collar crime
Conservatives to impose mandatory sentences on fraudsters, Nicholson says
Daniel Leblanc and Greg McArthur
Ottawa— The Globe and Mail
The Harper government is preparing a bill to toughen laws dealing with white-collar crime for the fall session, hoping to assuage the concerns of Canadians who are worried about losing their lifesavings to fraud schemes.
The Conservatives are planning to impose mandatory sentences for white-collar criminals and to prevent them from leaving jail after serving only one-sixth of their sentences, as is common for non-violent crimes.
"We give guidance [to judges] on maximum sentences, and I think it is appropriate to give guidance on minimum sentences as well," Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said during a conference call with reporters Thursday.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Whooping cranes nesting in northern Alberta
You have not seen Canada until you have seen the north
Pierre Elliot Trudeau
A not so new idea
I have noticed that many comments are totally off topic -- so readers comment on the Mensah case (and I agree that Dangerous Offender Status seems appropriate) in a Reform Party post. For a moment I thought of pulling the comments, but then I thought again because I never pull comments unless violent, sexually explicit or bigoted. Even if you think I am totally wrong -- and many comments suggest that -- I am happy for the response.
So, I will try to post once in a while calling for comments on anything. Perhaps that will spark posts but, if not, it will still allow for an exchange.
SO, COMMENT AWAY!!!
So, I will try to post once in a while calling for comments on anything. Perhaps that will spark posts but, if not, it will still allow for an exchange.
SO, COMMENT AWAY!!!
Guitar legend Les Paul dies at age 94; innovator was a key force in creator of rock 'n' roll
Les Paul, who invented the solid-body electric guitar later wielded by a legion of rock 'n' roll greats, died Thursday of complications from pneumonia. He was 94.
According to Gibson Guitar, Paul died at White Plains Hospital. His family and friends were by his side.
As an inventor, Paul also helped bring about the rise of rock 'n' roll with multitrack recording, which enables artists to record different instruments at different times, sing harmony with themselves, and then carefully balance the tracks in the finished recording.
The use of electric guitar gained popularity in the mid-to-late 1940s, and then exploded with the advent of rock in the mid-'50s.
Sufficiency of reasons in civil context
Sufficiency of reasons in the criminal context is an issue dealt with frequently by Canadian appeal courts. Sufficiency in the civil context is far less often an issue. That said, today's Ontario Court of Appeal decision in King's Bay Development Corp. v. Cornerstone Custom Homes Ltd., 2009 ONCA 611 makes clear that the same rules apply in both the civil and criminal context when considering sufficiency of reasons. There must be an understandable rationale for the decision. The Court holds:
[21] … King's Bay submits that the trial judge's reasons are sufficient and that the record supports his findings. It relies upon the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. M. (R.E.), [2008] 3 S.C.R. 3, where the court pointed out that a trial judge's reasons are sufficient if they show why the judge arrived at the decision; it is not necessary for the reasons to demonstrate how the judge reached the decision. But, as McLachlin C.J.C. said in R. v. M. (R.E.) at para. 20, "the trial judge need not expound on evidence which is uncontroversial, or detail his or her findings on each piece of evidence or controverted fact, so long as the findings linking the evidence to the verdict can be logically discerned" [emphasis added]. That was not done in this case. The reasons in this case contain bare conclusions tainted by a misapprehension of the parties' positions and a misunderstanding of the impact of Lack J.'s order. To the extent the reasons show why the trial judge arrived at his conclusions, the reasons are erroneous.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Ontario polar bears officially threatened species
If this leads to concrete action in terms of limits on hunting and the creation of protected sanctuary the change is a good one. I am very encouraged by the decision to make a recovery strategy a significant priority; I appreciate I am hardly impartial but polar bears are a central image of Canada and their protection is important.
Ontario polar bears officially threatened species
TheStar.com - Ontario - Ontario polar bears officially threatened species
August 12, 2009 THE CANADIAN PRESS
Polar bear populations in Ontario's north are on the decline, turning cautious concern for the animal's survival into planned action.
The Ontario government is changing the classification of the polar bear population from special concern to threatened species to ensure a greater protection of the bears.
"Once this (classification) happens, we need to create habitat regulation for the polar bear and a recovery strategy will need to be prepared by 2011," said Ivan Langrish, a communication's director for the Minister of Natural Resources.
The Minister of Natural Resources Donna Cansfield said melting ice and low survival rates are some of the reasons why the population has been waning over the past several years.
Impaired son -- does dad's insurance still apply?
Question:
If son drives drunk with dad's permission (dad owns car) does dad's insurance gets voided?
Answer:
Not voided - it's a little tricky/complex, but if son is G licensed and driving impaired with dad's permission, insurer still has duty to defend and indemnify both up to the policy limits.
If son is G1 or G2 licensed and has alcohol in blood stream and driving with dad's permission, this is considered a breach of the insurance policy and the insurance company would only have to indemnify son up to the statutory minimum of $200,000 - but for dad, if he knew son was going to drive with alcohol in his bloodstream then he gets the same indemnification.
If dad didn't know, then he is possibly covered up to the policy limits. In other words, a breach of a policy condition reduces the policy limits but the insurer is still on the hook.
The policy would be voided in other circumstances (ie, material misrepresentation on the application for insurance).
The result is counterintuitive - a drunk driver gets full defence and indemnification if G licensed and something less if not - but, oddly, that's the current state of the law.
(Thanks to Gina Nardella for this)
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
If son drives drunk with dad's permission (dad owns car) does dad's insurance gets voided?
Answer:
Not voided - it's a little tricky/complex, but if son is G licensed and driving impaired with dad's permission, insurer still has duty to defend and indemnify both up to the policy limits.
If son is G1 or G2 licensed and has alcohol in blood stream and driving with dad's permission, this is considered a breach of the insurance policy and the insurance company would only have to indemnify son up to the statutory minimum of $200,000 - but for dad, if he knew son was going to drive with alcohol in his bloodstream then he gets the same indemnification.
If dad didn't know, then he is possibly covered up to the policy limits. In other words, a breach of a policy condition reduces the policy limits but the insurer is still on the hook.
The policy would be voided in other circumstances (ie, material misrepresentation on the application for insurance).
The result is counterintuitive - a drunk driver gets full defence and indemnification if G licensed and something less if not - but, oddly, that's the current state of the law.
(Thanks to Gina Nardella for this)
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Taking To Kill a Mockingbird out of Canadian classrooms
Of all the novels I read in school one of the few I remember is To Kill a Mockingbird (what was Lord Jim about? Was it an early Startrek novel???).
To Kill a Mockingbird is a bit hokey but it does stick in the mind, and it's a good book for Grade 10. And certainly it is not racist. It is strongly anti-racist (so much so that the 'lesson' detracts a bit from the story).
But now To Kill a Mockingbird is being taken out of Canadian classrooms because intolerant bigots use racial language in the novel.
What madness! In a world of honour killings, AIDS and popular music that happily uses vile racial and anti-women language we have to ban a book that suggests racism is wrong and people should act in accordance with high principles?
Bathing costume problems in France
It is possible I suppose that a bathing costume could be un-hygienic because its made of fabric and not clean.
That said, if a bathing costume made of the ordinary materials such things are made of is somewhat more ample than customary so what?
It's hard to see how it could be less than hygienic. The size of the costume is not the issue.
Muslim woman denied pool access
Officials of French town say wearing a 'burquini,' which covers body head to toe, is un hygienic and potentially harmful to others
Paris— Associated Press
A French Muslim was denied last Aug.1, 2009 entry to a swimming pool for wearing an Islamic-style full-body swimsuit. Officials say the head-to-toe "burquini" is unhygienic and harmful to other bathers, but the woman complains of religious discrimination.
French officials say a Muslim woman wearing a head-to-toe swimsuit has been denied access to a public swimming pool in a town southeast of Paris.
Emerainville Mayor Alain Kelyor today said the 35-year-old woman was not allowed to swim in the pool wearing a "burquini" covering her body from head to toe. Officials say the outfit is unhygienic and potentially harmful to other swimmers.
“So you don’t trust politicians. Neither do we.”
Do you remember the 1994 Reform pamphlet saying:
"So you don't trust politicians. Neither do we."
Those words—the first sentence in bold black font, the second in green—blared from the 1994 pamphlet. Below were paragraphs of explanation, then one final credo: "Let's change the system."
Well, we now have had a Reform/Alliance/Conservative government for a while.
Is government transparent and open? Is debate on policies not personalities?
Is the system better or worse?
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
"So you don't trust politicians. Neither do we."
Those words—the first sentence in bold black font, the second in green—blared from the 1994 pamphlet. Below were paragraphs of explanation, then one final credo: "Let's change the system."
Well, we now have had a Reform/Alliance/Conservative government for a while.
Is government transparent and open? Is debate on policies not personalities?
Is the system better or worse?
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Canadians in foreign jails
I'm not sure the issue is as clear cut as suggested.
Transfers from foreign jails depend on the other country agreeing and Canada being satisfied as to safety issues. Also the numbers are so small that statistics may not mean much.
That said, there is little doubt the Conservatives have little sympathy for Canadians who run afoul of foreign laws -- see the whole death penalty brouhaha.
NDP backs bid to get public safety minister to reconsider denial of transfer request to Canadian prison
Penticton Herald
Wed Aug 12 2009
Page: A4
Section: News
Ottawa's refusal to allow a Canadian serving a U.S. prison
term for drug trafficking to transfer to a Canadian prison suggests the Conservatives' law-and- order stance is affecting its decisions, the NDP claims.
The New Democrats are supporting efforts by the family of B.C. resident Perley Holmes to get Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan to reconsider his transfer denial.
Public safety critic Don Davies says statistics suggest the number
of transfers approved under federal legislation has declined since the Tories took power in 2006.
"I think the minister is reading into this act ideological considerations that are not present in the legislation," said Davies, MP for Vancouver Kingsway.
It's part of the Tories' philosophy to leave Canadians caught up in
a foreign justice system to deal with it on their own, he said.
The Corrections Service of Canada report on international transfers, ending with fiscal 2006-07, says 39.4 per cent of applications in the last five years were denied, while 27.9 per cent were approved.
Davies said while the number of applications between 2003-04 and
2006-07 ranged in the mid-to-high 200s, approvals dropped sharply to 53 in 2006-07, from 90 in 2005-06.
"I see a precipitous drop on approvals in the first year of the
Conservatives taking power," he said.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Transfers from foreign jails depend on the other country agreeing and Canada being satisfied as to safety issues. Also the numbers are so small that statistics may not mean much.
That said, there is little doubt the Conservatives have little sympathy for Canadians who run afoul of foreign laws -- see the whole death penalty brouhaha.
NDP backs bid to get public safety minister to reconsider denial of transfer request to Canadian prison
Penticton Herald
Wed Aug 12 2009
Page: A4
Section: News
Ottawa's refusal to allow a Canadian serving a U.S. prison
term for drug trafficking to transfer to a Canadian prison suggests the Conservatives' law-and- order stance is affecting its decisions, the NDP claims.
The New Democrats are supporting efforts by the family of B.C. resident Perley Holmes to get Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan to reconsider his transfer denial.
Public safety critic Don Davies says statistics suggest the number
of transfers approved under federal legislation has declined since the Tories took power in 2006.
"I think the minister is reading into this act ideological considerations that are not present in the legislation," said Davies, MP for Vancouver Kingsway.
It's part of the Tories' philosophy to leave Canadians caught up in
a foreign justice system to deal with it on their own, he said.
The Corrections Service of Canada report on international transfers, ending with fiscal 2006-07, says 39.4 per cent of applications in the last five years were denied, while 27.9 per cent were approved.
Davies said while the number of applications between 2003-04 and
2006-07 ranged in the mid-to-high 200s, approvals dropped sharply to 53 in 2006-07, from 90 in 2005-06.
"I see a precipitous drop on approvals in the first year of the
Conservatives taking power," he said.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
I was wrong!
The clever thief story from Bristol Zoo was so amusing I posted it -- and then got comments suggesting it wasn't true. And candidly it didn't make a lot of sense -- and it isn't true:
http://www.snopes.com/crime/clever/carpark.asp
So, not for the first time, I am wrong. But the story is amusing nevertheless... .
http://www.snopes.com/crime/clever/carpark.asp
So, not for the first time, I am wrong. But the story is amusing nevertheless... .
Bow tie
I am coming to the conclusion that my preference for bow ties is a bit eccentric.
Walking out of an examiner's office today some young people stopped their car, jumped out and took my picture ...
Why?
Because I am such a media star??
Nope, because they thought it was so odd that I wore a bow tie.
Perhaps it is a bit dated to wear a bow tie -- on the other hand, I like my pocket watch too ... .
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Consent to search
Today's decision in R. v. Bergauer-Free, 2009 ONCA 610 deals with consent to search.
In this case the accused was misinformed of his rights by the detaining officer. The officer did not have proper grounds to search. As a result of the misinformation the accused consented to a search that led to incriminating evidence.
The Court of Appeal held the consent was vitiated by the misinformation:
57 On the facts of this case, however, the misinformation had the further effect of eviscerating any meaningful choice the appellant had available to him. Translated, the message he received from Officer Yousif was: - you can refuse to consent but it will do you no good because I will bring in the canine unit regardless. That amounts to what the United States Supreme Court referred to in Bumper v. North Carolina, 391 U.S. 543 (1968), as "colorably lawful coercion". And, as Stewart J. for the majority observed at p. 550: "Where there is coercion, there cannot be consent". I agree.
In this case the accused was misinformed of his rights by the detaining officer. The officer did not have proper grounds to search. As a result of the misinformation the accused consented to a search that led to incriminating evidence.
The Court of Appeal held the consent was vitiated by the misinformation:
57 On the facts of this case, however, the misinformation had the further effect of eviscerating any meaningful choice the appellant had available to him. Translated, the message he received from Officer Yousif was: - you can refuse to consent but it will do you no good because I will bring in the canine unit regardless. That amounts to what the United States Supreme Court referred to in Bumper v. North Carolina, 391 U.S. 543 (1968), as "colorably lawful coercion". And, as Stewart J. for the majority observed at p. 550: "Where there is coercion, there cannot be consent". I agree.
A well planned retirement
Outside England's Bristol Zoo there is a parking lot for 150 cars and 8 buses.
For 25 years, its parking fees were managed by a very pleasant attendant. The fees were £1 for cars ($1.40), £5 for buses (about $7).
Then, one day, after 25 solid years of never missing a day of work, he just didn't show up; so the Zoo Management called the City Council and asked it to send them another parking agent.
The Council did some research and replied that the parking lot was the Zoo's own responsibility. The Zoo advised the Council that the attendant was a City employee.
The City Council responded that the lot attendant had never been on the City payroll.
Meanwhile, sitting in his villa somewhere on the coast of Spain (or some such scenario), is a man who'd apparently had a ticket machine installed completely on his own; and then had simply begun to show up every day, commencing to collect and keep the parking fees, estimated at about $560 per day -- for 25 years.
Assuming 7 days a week, this amounts to just over $7 million dollars!
And no one even knows his name
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
For 25 years, its parking fees were managed by a very pleasant attendant. The fees were £1 for cars ($1.40), £5 for buses (about $7).
Then, one day, after 25 solid years of never missing a day of work, he just didn't show up; so the Zoo Management called the City Council and asked it to send them another parking agent.
The Council did some research and replied that the parking lot was the Zoo's own responsibility. The Zoo advised the Council that the attendant was a City employee.
The City Council responded that the lot attendant had never been on the City payroll.
Meanwhile, sitting in his villa somewhere on the coast of Spain (or some such scenario), is a man who'd apparently had a ticket machine installed completely on his own; and then had simply begun to show up every day, commencing to collect and keep the parking fees, estimated at about $560 per day -- for 25 years.
Assuming 7 days a week, this amounts to just over $7 million dollars!
And no one even knows his name
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Talmud as blog ...
The temptation to be current is very powerful for academics writing for the general public. It is a temptation that should be withstood.
I am reading an interesting book, "How Jesus became Christian" by Barrie Wilson, that presents a striking thesis -- modern Christianity is a religion about Christ but that religion is not the religion of Jesus. It's another book suggesting Paul hijacked Jesus' religion; but it's novel in its approach to the argument. The details of the argument do not matter here -- suffice it to say they are detailed and rely upon some fairly deep readings in the literature of Jews from the turn of the Common Era until say 600.
It is a book that needs to be taken seriously if it is considered at all.
But the author does things like describe the Talmud as a "blog". He uses fictitious headlines to illustrate what individual sects might think of, for example, Roman rule and pagans living in Palestine.
Such devices distract from the text and make the reader wonder if the book is worth considering or just another "Jesus got married, had kids and they are now Freemasons and rule the world secretly from a cave in Spain" book.
A careful review of Wilson's sources suggests his book is worth consideration -- and while I don't accept that Paul hijacked the Jesus Movement (and made Jesus the Christ he never was) his arguments are scholarly. But the Talmud as blog does not give confidence.
Scholarly books should be scholarly.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
I am reading an interesting book, "How Jesus became Christian" by Barrie Wilson, that presents a striking thesis -- modern Christianity is a religion about Christ but that religion is not the religion of Jesus. It's another book suggesting Paul hijacked Jesus' religion; but it's novel in its approach to the argument. The details of the argument do not matter here -- suffice it to say they are detailed and rely upon some fairly deep readings in the literature of Jews from the turn of the Common Era until say 600.
It is a book that needs to be taken seriously if it is considered at all.
But the author does things like describe the Talmud as a "blog". He uses fictitious headlines to illustrate what individual sects might think of, for example, Roman rule and pagans living in Palestine.
Such devices distract from the text and make the reader wonder if the book is worth considering or just another "Jesus got married, had kids and they are now Freemasons and rule the world secretly from a cave in Spain" book.
A careful review of Wilson's sources suggests his book is worth consideration -- and while I don't accept that Paul hijacked the Jesus Movement (and made Jesus the Christ he never was) his arguments are scholarly. But the Talmud as blog does not give confidence.
Scholarly books should be scholarly.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Fried hardware
Our computers took a lightening bolt a day or so ago. They seemed ok yesterday but are fried today. It may be a slow day for Polar Bears and caselaw!!!
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Monday, August 10, 2009
Polling numbers
The latest poll by Nanos Research, completed by a random sample of about 1,000 Canadians between July 30 and August 2, shows 33.8% of the electorate would cast a ballot for the Liberals, versus 31.3% for the Conservative Party.
The numbers are considered accurate to within 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
From a leadership standpoint, 29.5% of Canadians said Mr. Harper would make the best prime minister, while 26.2% opted for Mr. Ignatieff.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Tim's and Gay Marriage
The story below may well reflect nothing more than a local oversight. After all, when a charity approaches a Tim's to sponsor an event there may be little close screening. Here someone may have assumed the organization was more for families generally than against a specific kind of family. Indeed, if I had to guess I might think the National Organization for Marriage supports Gay rights.
And remember, the KKK has renamed itself specifically so that it can get legitimate support from people who don't know who they are supporting.
That said, Tim's acted quickly and made it clear they are not supporting religious or political groups (so does that mean no coffee urns at Church picnics???). (And to my mind coffee urns at Church picnics is a good thing -- but to support a group devoted to opposing Gay marriage is not.)
Anyway, the lesson is, when you give to charity make sure you know who you're giving to!!!
Tim Hortons pulls support for anti-gay marriage eventCanadian icon Tim Hortons found itself under fire Monday after a Rhode Island franchise initially sponsored an event for a U.S. anti-gay marriage group.
Tim Hortons was listed as a sponsor for the Aug. 16 event in Warwick, R.I., for the National Organization for Marriage, which is one of the largest anti-gay marriage lobby groups in the U.S.
There was an immediate backlash online from the gay and lesbian community, with more than 1,600 people signing up for a petition at Change.org asking Tim Hortons to withdraw its support for the event.
By Monday afternoon, the company announced that the Rhode Island franchise would not be sponsoring the event because it would be against its corporate policy to support religious or political groups.
"It has come to our attention that the Rhode Island event organizer and purpose of the event fall outside of our sponsorship guidelines. As such, Tim Hortons can not provide support at the event," the company said on its website. "We apologize for any misunderstanding or inconvenience this may have caused.
"As a company, our primary focus is on helping children and supporting fundraising events for non-profit organizations and registered charities. For this reason, Tim Hortons has not sponsored those representing religious groups, political affiliates or lobby groups."
According to the company, more than 95 per cent of its stores are independently owned, and the "final decision to make a donation is at the discretion of the store owner," says the company's website.
Remedy for late disclosure
R. v. Bjelland, 2009 SCC 38 is an interesting example of the changing views of the Supreme Court towards Charter breaches. It is becoming very challenging to exclude evidence on the basis of a Charter breach.
The accused was charged with importing cocaine and possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. After pre-preliminary hearing conferences, the Crown indicated that disclosure was substantially complete. A preliminary hearing was subsequently held and a trial date set for May 1, 2006. In March and April 2006, the Crown provided the accused with evidence from two alleged accomplices, both of whom were to be called at trial. The accused moved for a stay of proceedings or, alternately, for the exclusion of the evidence on the grounds that his right to make full answer and defence had been prejudiced by the late disclosure. The trial judge ordered the exclusion of the late disclosed evidence under s. 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. At trial, the accused was acquitted. The Court of Appeal, in a majority decision, set aside the acquittal and ordered a new trial, finding that the trial judge committed a reviewable error by failing to consider whether a less severe remedy than exclusion of evidence could have cured the prejudice to the accused.
Exclusion of evidence obtained in conformity with the Charter is only available as a remedy under s. 24(1) of the Charter where (a) late disclosure renders the trial process unfair and this unfairness cannot be remedied through an adjournment and disclosure order or (b) exclusion is necessary to maintain the integrity of the justice system. The integrity of the justice system requires that the accused receive a trial that is fair in that it satisfies the public interest in getting at the truth, while preserving basic procedural fairness for the accused. Because the exclusion of evidence impacts on trial fairness from society's perspective, insofar as it impairs the truth‑seeking function of trials, it will not be appropriate and just to exclude evidence under s. 24(1) where a trial judge can fashion an appropriate remedy for late disclosure that does not deny procedural fairness to the accused and where admission of the evidence does not otherwise compromise the integrity of the justice system.
The trial judge committed a reviewable error by failing to consider whether the prejudice to the accused's right to a fair trial could be remedied without excluding the evidence. The Crown provided the accused with disclosure, albeit late, and there is no suggestion that the Crown had engaged in deliberate misconduct. In the circumstances of this case, an adjournment and a disclosure order would have sufficiently addressed the prejudice to the accused while preserving society's interest in a fair trial. By ordering the exclusion of the evidence, the trial judge misdirected himself and did not impose an appropriate and just remedy.
The accused's s. 7 Charter right to make full answer and defence was not infringed by his inability to cross‑examine the potential Crown witnesses at a preliminary hearing. The material provided to the accused was sufficient disclosure of the Crown's case against him, and cross‑examining a witness at a preliminary hearing is not a component of the s. 7 right to make full answer and defence.
The Court writes:
[20] Before being entitled to a remedy under s. 24(1), the party seeking such a remedy must establish a breach of his or her Charter rights. In a case of late disclosure, the underlying Charter infringement will normally be to s. 7. Section 7 of the Charter protects the right of the accused to make full answer and defence. In order to make full answer and defence, the Crown must provide the accused with complete and timely disclosure: see R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326. The purpose underlying the Crown's obligation to disclose is explained by Rosenberg J.A. in R. v. Horan, 2008 ONCA 589, 237 C.C.C. (3d) 514, at para. 26:
Put simply, disclosure is a means to an end. Full prosecution disclosure is to ensure that the accused receives a fair trial, that the accused has an adequate opportunity to respond to the prosecution case and that in the result the verdict is a reliable one.
[21] However, the Crown's failure to disclose evidence does not, in and of itself, constitute a violation of s. 7. Rather, an accused must generally show "actual prejudice to [his or her] ability to make full answer and defence" (R. v. O'Connor, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 411, at para. 74) in order to be entitled to a remedy under s. 24(1).
[22] While the accused must receive a fair trial, the trial must be fair from both the perspective of the accused and of society more broadly. In R. v. Harrer, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 562, McLachlin J. (as she then was) provided guidance on what is meant by trial fairness. She stated, at para. 45, that:
At base, a fair trial is a trial that appears fair, both from the perspective of the accused and the perspective of the community. A fair trial must not be confused with the most advantageous trial possible from the accused's point of view: R. v.
[23] Apart from ensuring trial fairness, there is one other circumstances in which late disclosed evidence might be excluded. That is where to admit the evidence would compromise the integrity of the justice system.
[24] Thus, a trial judge should only exclude evidence for late disclosure in exceptional cases: (a) where the late disclosure renders the trial process unfair and this unfairness cannot be remedied through an adjournment and disclosure order or (b) where exclusion is necessary to maintain the integrity of the justice system. Because the exclusion of evidence impacts on trial fairness from society's perspective insofar as it impairs the truth-seeking function of trials, where a trial judge can fashion an appropriate remedy for late disclosure that does not deny procedural fairness to the accused and where admission of the evidence does not otherwise compromise the integrity of the justice system, it will not be appropriate and just to exclude evidence under s. 24(1).
Somali Islamists pull teeth from "sinners"
Madness!
Somali Islamists pull teeth from "sinners"
By Abdi Sheikh
MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Somali Islamist group al Shabaab is forcibly removing gold and silver teeth from residents in southern Somalia because it says they contravene strict religious law, locals from a coastal town said on Monday.
Residents in Marka say al Shabaab has been rounding up anyone seen with a silver or gold tooth and taking them to a masked man who then rips them out using basic tools.
"I never thought al Shabaab would see my denture as a sin. They took me to their station and removed my silver tooth," resident Bashir told Reuters. "I met several men and women whose dentures were being pulled out by a masked man they called a doctor.
The doctor used a pincer or his gloved hand depending on the strength of the tooth," Bashir said. "As you smile your silver tooth accuses you. I was at a counter with my friend when three armed al Shabaab ordered me to follow them," he added. "I am afraid they want to make money from taking all this precious metal."
Al Shabaab officials declined to comment. The Islamist group says the gold and silver teeth are used for fashion and beauty, which is against strict interpretations of Islam, residents told Reuters. The crude dental work has fueled fears of health risks.
"Pulling or replacing teeth may lead to loss of blood and neurological damage. The tooth may break and the remaining piece may cause sepsis,"
Mohamed Mohamud, dean of faculty of medicine at Mogadishu's Benadir University, told Reuters. "Worse, careless treatment may spread HIV," he added.
Al Shabaab, which means "Youth" in Arabic, is an al Qaeda-inspired militant group that has taken control of large swathes of south and central Somalia.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Somali Islamists pull teeth from "sinners"
By Abdi Sheikh
MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Somali Islamist group al Shabaab is forcibly removing gold and silver teeth from residents in southern Somalia because it says they contravene strict religious law, locals from a coastal town said on Monday.
Residents in Marka say al Shabaab has been rounding up anyone seen with a silver or gold tooth and taking them to a masked man who then rips them out using basic tools.
"I never thought al Shabaab would see my denture as a sin. They took me to their station and removed my silver tooth," resident Bashir told Reuters. "I met several men and women whose dentures were being pulled out by a masked man they called a doctor.
The doctor used a pincer or his gloved hand depending on the strength of the tooth," Bashir said. "As you smile your silver tooth accuses you. I was at a counter with my friend when three armed al Shabaab ordered me to follow them," he added. "I am afraid they want to make money from taking all this precious metal."
Al Shabaab officials declined to comment. The Islamist group says the gold and silver teeth are used for fashion and beauty, which is against strict interpretations of Islam, residents told Reuters. The crude dental work has fueled fears of health risks.
"Pulling or replacing teeth may lead to loss of blood and neurological damage. The tooth may break and the remaining piece may cause sepsis,"
Mohamed Mohamud, dean of faculty of medicine at Mogadishu's Benadir University, told Reuters. "Worse, careless treatment may spread HIV," he added.
Al Shabaab, which means "Youth" in Arabic, is an al Qaeda-inspired militant group that has taken control of large swathes of south and central Somalia.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
A scary phonecall
It's the National Post calling about your criminal client XYZ.
We want to ask you about the press release your client sent out this morning about all the facts of the case ... .
We want to ask you about the press release your client sent out this morning about all the facts of the case ... .
It's all our fault ..
Really sweetheart, it's not you, it's me ... .
Stephen Harper is trying to repair frayed relations with Mexico despite his refusal to roll back new entry restrictions for its citizens, emerging from a meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderon Sunday night to say it's Canada's dysfunctional refugee system that made him do it.
Blaming Canada for the move is Mr. Harper's attempt to soothe the feelings of an insulted NAFTA partner just before three-way talks begin on a raft of other pressing issues – from the economy to trade.
“This is not the fault of the government of Mexico – let me be very clear about this,” Mr. Harper told reporters, explaining his mid-July decision to clamp down on soaring bogus refugee claims from Mexico by requiring Mexicans to obtain visas before entering Canada.
“This is a problem in Canadian refugee law which encourages bogus claims.”
Stephen Harper is trying to repair frayed relations with Mexico despite his refusal to roll back new entry restrictions for its citizens, emerging from a meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderon Sunday night to say it's Canada's dysfunctional refugee system that made him do it.
Blaming Canada for the move is Mr. Harper's attempt to soothe the feelings of an insulted NAFTA partner just before three-way talks begin on a raft of other pressing issues – from the economy to trade.
“This is not the fault of the government of Mexico – let me be very clear about this,” Mr. Harper told reporters, explaining his mid-July decision to clamp down on soaring bogus refugee claims from Mexico by requiring Mexicans to obtain visas before entering Canada.
“This is a problem in Canadian refugee law which encourages bogus claims.”
Pray for the United Church
Pray for the United Church
The Ottawa Citizen
August 7, 2009
Reports that anti-Semitism is incubating in some corners of the United Church are generating anger toward the church, from both Christians and Jews. But the anger might be misplaced, because the church could end up the principal victim.
...
It's wrong to assume that critics of Israel are by definition anti-Jewish.
But it's also true that every anti-Semite is most assuredly an anti-Zionist, so there is overlap between the groups. Identifying instances when the campaign to delegitimize Israel is a cover to attack Jews has always been a challenge. One giveaway is the appearance of age-old anti-Semitic tropes.
Which brings us back to the United Church of Canada. Beginning this weekend, the church will hold its General Council in Kelowna, B.C. The church will consider numerous resolutions, among them several that express extreme hostility to Israel.
It's not just the double standard — singling out Israel, a liberal democracy, as the world's greatest outlaw state? — that raises old memories of scapegoating the Jews. No, it's the language in the background materials, available on the United Church's website, that has shocked so many people.
One document warns that "some Members of Parliament are affiliated with the State of Israel" and "have sensitive roles in Canada." Is this a coded reference to Jewish MPs, in an attempt to raise the ancient accusation that Jews are duplicitous and have dual loyalties?
It gets worse. The church document accuses the Canadian Parliament of harbouring MPs who are actually citizens of Israel. This is a lie. So far as anyone knows, there are no MPs who hold Israeli citizenship. But what if there were? Parliament is a multicultural and diverse place, like Canadian society generally. It's conspicuous that the United Church is not witchhunting South Asian or Muslim MPs to out those who hold dual citizenship. Only Jews constitute an enemy within.
The head of the church, moderator Rev. David Giuliano, acknowledged Tuesday that all of this is causing "pain and hurt to Jewish people in Canada," yet he refuses to disown the architects of this campaign. Instead, he said that a rabbi will be invited to have "full speaking" privileges at the Kelowna conference. Will the rabbi be expected to answer the charge that Jews — sorry, people "affiliated" with Israel — should not have "sensitive" government jobs? Or that the Canadian Revenue Agency should stop allowing tax deductions for respected Jewish charities, another idea that can be found in the materials posted on the church's website?
Admirers of the United Church are right to be despondent. As one newspaper letter-writer put it, even if the proposals are rejected in Kelowna, "severe and irreparable damage has been done to the credibility of the (church) as a viable and doctrinally sound organization."
The United Church of Canada isn't the first organization that hatemongers have tried to convert into a vehicle for attacking Israel. Labour unions, student associations, even a camping store (Mountain Equipment Co-op) have had to fight off similar hijackings, not always successfully.
People with radical or hateful ideas know that by themselves they will remain marginal voices, so they infiltrate respectable institutions in order to give legitimacy to their agenda. The United Church is a great institution, and Canadians should pray that it is able to fight off those who would shame it.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
From 1689 Bill of Rights
"It is the right of the subjects to petition the King and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal."
This critical right -- the right to petition the Crown, the right to protest peacefully -- is the root of virtually all other civil rights. Arguably, both negative and positive liberty, in the Berlin sense, rest on the right to peaceful protest.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Crime fighting coordination
Much crime -- sex trade workers, guns, drugs -- is international and it makes sense to coordinate law enforcement amongst the three North American countries.
My sense that the "war on drugs" is preposterous doesn't change that -- of course, if we went to way Portugal did and went to treatment rather than criminalization, the drug cartels would vanish (remember Al Capone? The end of Prohibition ended the criminal gangs dealing in bootleg booze).
That said, and recognising my views on drugs are not going to be law any time soon, this crime initiative is a good idea.
Harper unveils anti-crime program as summit begins
Andrew Mayeda, National Post
Sunday, Aug 9, 2009
GUADALAJARA, Mexico -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper unveiled a new program to help fight crime in the Americas as he arrived in Mexico on Sunday for a summit with U.S. President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
Through the Anti-Crime Capacity Building Program, Canada will invest as much as $15-million a year in projects across the Americas that combat the illicit drug trade, corruption, human-trafficking and other regional problems.
Roughly half a million dollars of the program's annual total will go to Mexico to assist in its drug war. Drug-related violence has spiked in the country as rival cartels vie for control of the North American market.
With the aid of the United States and other international partners, Canada will provide training for 300 mid-level Mexican officers.
The program's funding was earmarked in last January's federal budget.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
My sense that the "war on drugs" is preposterous doesn't change that -- of course, if we went to way Portugal did and went to treatment rather than criminalization, the drug cartels would vanish (remember Al Capone? The end of Prohibition ended the criminal gangs dealing in bootleg booze).
That said, and recognising my views on drugs are not going to be law any time soon, this crime initiative is a good idea.
Harper unveils anti-crime program as summit begins
Andrew Mayeda, National Post
Sunday, Aug 9, 2009
GUADALAJARA, Mexico -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper unveiled a new program to help fight crime in the Americas as he arrived in Mexico on Sunday for a summit with U.S. President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
Through the Anti-Crime Capacity Building Program, Canada will invest as much as $15-million a year in projects across the Americas that combat the illicit drug trade, corruption, human-trafficking and other regional problems.
Roughly half a million dollars of the program's annual total will go to Mexico to assist in its drug war. Drug-related violence has spiked in the country as rival cartels vie for control of the North American market.
With the aid of the United States and other international partners, Canada will provide training for 300 mid-level Mexican officers.
The program's funding was earmarked in last January's federal budget.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Lawless in Iran
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"
Unfortunately, life is mirroring literature.
Seven lawyers in Tabriz and Mashhad who had been representing young Iranians detained in post-presidential election protests have been killed by the Iranian authorities in recent days, according to sources in Iran.
Their deaths have deterred other lawyers from taking detainees' cases, they added. . . .
In Tabriz, Iran's fourth-largest city, the bodies of five lawyers were returned to their families earlier this week, the sources said. The five had been representing some of the hundreds of Iranians detained in the northwestern city during the post-election protests. They were then themselves accused of disrupting security and encouraging unethical actions against the regime, and were sentenced to three years each in jail.
Three of them then died from injuries suffered during their detention. They were so badly beaten that their families could barely recognise their faces, this reporter was told.
The other two--prominent figures in the local community--were executed, having been sentenced to death on trumped-up charges of drug possession, the sources said.
It's a useful reminder of the evil of the Iranian regime--and a reminder that a society without lawyers is a society without law.
And to me what is most shocking is that I always considered Iran to be a lawful country -- perhaps not laws I could support but a place where there were laws that were followed.
As Isaiah Berlin points out there can be a tyranny of oppressive laws but at least those laws are knowable. Here is seems that for all the pretence of Shariah, Iran's government is now fundamentally lawless.
It begins to remind me of the last days of apartheid where the system was breaking down such that the pass laws were not enough and goon squads were needed to maintain the government.
(Thanks to Mark Persaud for the story)
Unfortunately, life is mirroring literature.
Seven lawyers in Tabriz and Mashhad who had been representing young Iranians detained in post-presidential election protests have been killed by the Iranian authorities in recent days, according to sources in Iran.
Their deaths have deterred other lawyers from taking detainees' cases, they added. . . .
In Tabriz, Iran's fourth-largest city, the bodies of five lawyers were returned to their families earlier this week, the sources said. The five had been representing some of the hundreds of Iranians detained in the northwestern city during the post-election protests. They were then themselves accused of disrupting security and encouraging unethical actions against the regime, and were sentenced to three years each in jail.
Three of them then died from injuries suffered during their detention. They were so badly beaten that their families could barely recognise their faces, this reporter was told.
The other two--prominent figures in the local community--were executed, having been sentenced to death on trumped-up charges of drug possession, the sources said.
It's a useful reminder of the evil of the Iranian regime--and a reminder that a society without lawyers is a society without law.
And to me what is most shocking is that I always considered Iran to be a lawful country -- perhaps not laws I could support but a place where there were laws that were followed.
As Isaiah Berlin points out there can be a tyranny of oppressive laws but at least those laws are knowable. Here is seems that for all the pretence of Shariah, Iran's government is now fundamentally lawless.
It begins to remind me of the last days of apartheid where the system was breaking down such that the pass laws were not enough and goon squads were needed to maintain the government.
(Thanks to Mark Persaud for the story)
Legal Aid
Legal aid does not get a great deal of public sympathy.
That's probably because it's seen as being free legal help for criminals who are better convicted quickly and sent to jail.
Now, that (over simplified) attitude may not be praiseworthy but it is understandable.
And most efforts to get public support for legal aid do not take that attitude into account.
But there are good reasons to support proper legal aid that recognises the concern.
First, of course, much legal aid is not for criminal law; there is family law, workers compensation, pension benefits and other areas where sympathetic people need legal help.
But more, on the criminal side, if legal aid isn't provided then many accused will be self represented.
And that's a very bad thing because self represented accused take cases to trial and take cases through trial slooooowly.
Criminal cases can be slow with a lawyer but have a self represented accused and a 3 hour trial takes 2 days. Which means other trials won't happen and eventually guilty accused are released since their cases take too long to come to trial. It's a bit like the mass jail releases in the US -- so many people are sent to jail that the system overloads and everyone is set free regardless of the danger they present to society.
In this way legal aid is seen as a health measure for society -- it's not just a free gift to poor accused.
Of course, there is another (and better) reason for legal aid.
Justice is not justice if it is only for the rich. Yes, it is true the rich get more representation but that is a reality and not an ideal.
Tradition says that after the Flood God instructed all people in the certain basic principles -- one was to establish fair courts of justice where all would be treated equally before the law. To meet that obligation legal assistance ought to be given to those who need it but cannot pay for it. This is the true basis for legal aid.
That's probably because it's seen as being free legal help for criminals who are better convicted quickly and sent to jail.
Now, that (over simplified) attitude may not be praiseworthy but it is understandable.
And most efforts to get public support for legal aid do not take that attitude into account.
But there are good reasons to support proper legal aid that recognises the concern.
First, of course, much legal aid is not for criminal law; there is family law, workers compensation, pension benefits and other areas where sympathetic people need legal help.
But more, on the criminal side, if legal aid isn't provided then many accused will be self represented.
And that's a very bad thing because self represented accused take cases to trial and take cases through trial slooooowly.
Criminal cases can be slow with a lawyer but have a self represented accused and a 3 hour trial takes 2 days. Which means other trials won't happen and eventually guilty accused are released since their cases take too long to come to trial. It's a bit like the mass jail releases in the US -- so many people are sent to jail that the system overloads and everyone is set free regardless of the danger they present to society.
In this way legal aid is seen as a health measure for society -- it's not just a free gift to poor accused.
Of course, there is another (and better) reason for legal aid.
Justice is not justice if it is only for the rich. Yes, it is true the rich get more representation but that is a reality and not an ideal.
Tradition says that after the Flood God instructed all people in the certain basic principles -- one was to establish fair courts of justice where all would be treated equally before the law. To meet that obligation legal assistance ought to be given to those who need it but cannot pay for it. This is the true basis for legal aid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)