http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Conservatives+plead+guilty+violating+election+rules/5695342/story.html#ixzz1dQuZ1glr
After four years of denying wrongdoing, the federal Conservative party and its fundraising arm has pleaded guilty to overspending on advertising in the 2006 election and violating electoral law in the long running "in and out" case.
The party and the Conservative Fund Canada each entered guilty pleas to two reduced Elections Act offences in an Ottawa courtroom Thursday afternoon after cutting a deal with Crown prosecutors.
The Tories admitted to exceeding the $18.3-million spending limit and filing an election return that did not report all expenses incurred.
The Crown agreed to withdraw related charges against four Conservative officials, including two sitting senators, Irving Gerstein and Doug Finley.
Judge Celynne Dorval of the Ontario Court of Justice assigned the stiffest penalties available under the law. In total, each organization will pay $52,000 in fines. That's just a fraction of the amount prosecutors say was illegally transferred from the party to its candidates to fund advertising purchases during the final weeks of the 2006 election.
Even as the party admitted it had broken the law, the Tories showed no sign of contrition and issued a statement claiming they had scored "a big victory" in the case, noting that no individuals were found to have done anything wrong.
"The Conservative Party of Canada plays by the same rules as everyone else; we acted under the law as it was understood by Elections Canada at that time," the party said.
6 comments:
I don't always make an honest mistake, but when I do, I make sure to forge financial documents to submit to the government.
Oh, please. As much as I enjoy your blog, James (and I don't say that to any other Liberals), you're out to lunch on this one. As a lawyer yourself, you are well aware that the prosecution doesn't need to plea bargain if they have a strong enough case. They didn't, and they knew it.
On the other hand some Libs are insisting this is worse than ADscam!! It is clear that some of you guys still don't get it. Unfortunately for the Libs, the voters do.
Actually Fred, I dont agree -- I did a plea myself this last week where the Crown had a really overwhelming case -- the Crown takes pleas to get rid of stuff. Now, in fairness, here with the profile the taking of a plea may well reflect weakness -- or it may well reflect the fact that, outside of the political world, it is a small matter and one that would suck up Crown resources needed for much more serious matters. But thatnks for the comment and you have a point!
And the defence doesn't need a plea bargain unless they think they're going to lose. Especially when they want to present the image of squeaky-clean Law & Order, Honesty, Integrity, etc. Only now, after five years in court (and an increasing number of scandals where the Cons or their subordinates have shown their contempt for the law), does the Conservative government enter into a plea agreement with the Conservative Party?
The prosecution never said they didn't have a strong enough case, they in fact said the opposite. What they did say was that it wasn't worth it, MONETARILY, to spend further hundreds of thousands while the CPC dragged out the court process, in order to recover a max of 52k in fines, when they could just get 52k in fines today. This completely ignores that charges were against individuals (who would lose their jobs!) and jail-time was in the picture.
A party untainted by scandal would be able to make much out of this case.
Post a Comment