Saturday, September 25, 2010

An identity and now a symbol!

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post, "Would you at least consider a symbol?"

I am flattered by your desire to provide me with an identity. I wouldn't presume to use the motto of another, perhaps "veritas justitia honoris" is one I can live with.

With regard to the questions you posed. As I understand it, a complaint filed with the CJC is a separate entity from a lawsuit. A complaint against a federal judge relates to conduct, not a decision, and therefore is unaffected by proceedings in the court. However, considering the behaviour of other governing bodies, this too may fall by the wayside.

As I understand a pardon forgives the wrongdoer of the conviction and restores their civil rights. A search of an individual who has been pardoned, should not reveal the conviction which was pardoned. As such, a pardon is designed to 'erase' a conviction and the person is restored to an "innocent" state. The revelation by Mr. Gange of Mr. Chapman's past, as it relates to his pardoned offences, is a privacy breach (in my opinion), though I'm sure Mr. Gagne would argue "a mistake" as pardons are not published, and so while knowledge of the conviction is not erased in the public mind, merely a database.

As for my other queries, I have no answers, but continue to seek...

Veritas Justitia Honoris
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Veritas Justitia Honoris:

Thank you for writing - much, much better than "Deep Throat II" which never really fit. Of course you realize you now need a heraldic crest to go with that so we Googled VJH. This was the most impressive we found. Not sure, however, what it means - no matter. By the way it came with its own song but was lost transitioning into our image archive.

Here's what Mike McIntyre (Winnipeg Free Press reporter) said in his September 10, 2010 article ("Legal Fight Grows in Controversey - accuser sees bias doubts fair trial"):

"Chapman told court Thursday he is angry he seems to be painted as the enemy. Chapman accused King's lawyer of "slander" for bringing up the fact he was convicted of arson and uttering threats in 1993 in an attempt to discredit him. Chapman says he received a pardon for his crimes, which are registered under his previous legal name of Lenard Quaccoo."

William Gange, Jack King's lawyer, has a Motion Hearing scheduled for next month. Because of his Brief's length (64 pages including 3 - Tabs) replete with authorities, case precedents and detailed legal arguments we chose not to reporduce it. However, much of Mr. Gange's case seemed to be based on Manitoba's Privacy Act which to us seems a tad ironic.

Perhaps you could answer this for our readers. The Queen's Bench Disposition Sheet for the September 22, 2010 Motion Hearing presided over by Justice Kenneth Hanssen indicates Mr. Chapman's lawsuit again Jack King was summarily dismissed "with prejudice by consent." What is the significance, if any, of "with prejudice?"

Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good afternoon,

I am touched by your desire to provide a symbol, feel free to attach whatever you think is fun.

As for your question regarding "with prejudice" - when a suit is dismissed with prejudice, it means the plaintiff is barred from ever bringing the claim forward again. So, essentially, the claim against Douglas has been dismissed, and Chapman can never take action againt her in the courts for this particular set of circumstances again.

Looks like you're having fun in the court file, I enjoy the access to the documents, as I don't have the time to spend at the courthouse myself. It is individuals such as yourself, who continue to demonstrate for myself that not all of society is lost to the age of indulgence and self-gratification.

VJH

4:28 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home