Cost is no objective ..... or in the alternative, to hell with taxpayers!
Good Day Readers:
The thought previously occurred, why doesn't the Douglas Inquiry install an animated debt clock on the wall of the courtroom a la the Canadian Taxpayers Federation?
Calibrate it such that the public can see the second-by-second total cost, as well as, each Manitobans' share. By the time the circus is over how much do you figure it will cost you? But it just gets more interesting. To this backdrop we have Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin telling us she is concerned about middle-income Canadians' inability to afford lawyers. Well, first they will have to finish paying for the Douglas Inquiry.
Below is today's Press Release issued by the Canadian Judicial Council setting out the verbatim decision delivered by Inquiry Committee Chair Alberta Chief Justice Catherine Fraser (Friday, July 27, 2012 - 22-pages) outlining the decision to deny Lori Douglas' Lead Counsel Sheila Block's request to halt the process because of an "apprehension of bias."
Now we learn the same Sheila Block has filed an application with the Federal Court of Canada to quash the Inquiry using the same "apprehension of bias" argument.
As if not to be left out of the equation, Independent Counsel Guy "The Cat" Pratte representing the public interest has also filed an application with the FCC asking that Inquiry Counsel George "The New Rocky" Macintosh's cross-examination of Jack "Polaroid" King be expunged along with that of Thompson Dorfman Sweatman Senior Managing Partner Michael Sinclair. But not being content with that, he asked that "Rocky" not be allowed to cross-examine any more witnesses.
Sat through "Rocky's" crosses of Messrs Sinclair and King both of which, in our opinion, were nothing short of masterful. Interestingly enough, after he finished with Michael Sinclair we don't recall Ms Block jumping to her feet to object.
So where does this leave us? Two hearings before the Federal Court of Canada (Winnipeg?) to consider Sheila Block and Guy Pratte's applications. Supposing Ms Block gets judicially whacked again, as we think she will, the Inquiry will resume. Initially, December was mentioned but will that still hold? According to our calculations 9-more witnesses remain to be heard after which final summations written and oral will have to be heard.
That should take us well into 2013 but then the Committee's final written report still has to be written. But it might not end there. Team Block-Reynolds could appeal an unfavourable "final" decision to the Federal Court of Canada. Could they petition the Supreme Court of Canada if still dissatisfied? God only knows. It is out understanding the appeal process would be paid by, yes, taxpayers.
And so to the Inquiry Committee and Counsel we say,
Sincerely,
The thought previously occurred, why doesn't the Douglas Inquiry install an animated debt clock on the wall of the courtroom a la the Canadian Taxpayers Federation?
Below is today's Press Release issued by the Canadian Judicial Council setting out the verbatim decision delivered by Inquiry Committee Chair Alberta Chief Justice Catherine Fraser (Friday, July 27, 2012 - 22-pages) outlining the decision to deny Lori Douglas' Lead Counsel Sheila Block's request to halt the process because of an "apprehension of bias."
Now we learn the same Sheila Block has filed an application with the Federal Court of Canada to quash the Inquiry using the same "apprehension of bias" argument.
As if not to be left out of the equation, Independent Counsel Guy "The Cat" Pratte representing the public interest has also filed an application with the FCC asking that Inquiry Counsel George "The New Rocky" Macintosh's cross-examination of Jack "Polaroid" King be expunged along with that of Thompson Dorfman Sweatman Senior Managing Partner Michael Sinclair. But not being content with that, he asked that "Rocky" not be allowed to cross-examine any more witnesses.
So where does this leave us? Two hearings before the Federal Court of Canada (Winnipeg?) to consider Sheila Block and Guy Pratte's applications. Supposing Ms Block gets judicially whacked again, as we think she will, the Inquiry will resume. Initially, December was mentioned but will that still hold? According to our calculations 9-more witnesses remain to be heard after which final summations written and oral will have to be heard.
That should take us well into 2013 but then the Committee's final written report still has to be written. But it might not end there. Team Block-Reynolds could appeal an unfavourable "final" decision to the Federal Court of Canada. Could they petition the Supreme Court of Canada if still dissatisfied? God only knows. It is out understanding the appeal process would be paid by, yes, taxpayers.
 |
| "Just keep on riffin' man, Ca-Ching! Ca-Ching! Ca-Ching!" |
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Manitoba judge's lawyer wants sex inquiry quashed
Monday, August 20, 2012
Another round of legal wrangling has erupted that could derail the inquiry into a Manitoba judge whose nude photos appeared on the internet.
Lori Douglas's lawyer, Sheila Block, filed an application Monday with the Federal Court of Canada to quash the inquiry due to a "reasonable apprehension of bias."
Block alleges that George Macintosh, the lawyer who has been asking questions on behalf of the five-member committee overseeing the inquiry, has engaged in "aggressive and argumentative questions, sexist and insulting references, misstatements and distortions of the evidence and attacks on (Douglas's) character and credibility."
Guy Pratte, the independent lawyer leading the inquiry, filed a similar but separate motion Monday.
He did not ask the Federal Court to end the inquiry, but only to prevent Macintosh from asking any more questions and strike his previous questions from the record.
Pratte said the inquiry committee, which includes the chief justices of Alberta, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador, has over-stepped its bounds by becoming involved in a hearing while also presiding over it.
"The procedure adopted by the committee is beyond its jurisdiction, violates the (Canadian Judicial Council) bylaws and policies and … is inconsistent with the principles of fairness by which the committee is legally bound," Pratte wrote.
The inquiry committee is examining whether Douglas should be removed from the bench. Douglas is an associate chief justice of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, heading up the family court division.
In 2003, when Douglas and King were family law lawyers at the same firm, King uploaded sexually explicit photos of Douglas on a website dedicated to interracial sex. Some showed her in bondage gear or performing sex acts. He also emailed photos to a client named Alexander Chapman and asked him to have sex with Douglas.
Chapman complained to the law firm and King settled the matter within weeks by paying Chapman $25,000 to return all the photos and to never discuss the matter.
Chapman broke that deal in 2010 and complained to the judicial council, insisting Douglas was part of the sexual harassment.
Among the allegations before the inquiry is that Douglas did not disclose the matter when she applied to be a judge. She applied three times before finally being accepted in 2005.
The inquiry is also examining whether the very existence of the photos precludes Douglas from continuing in her job.
Douglas has said all along that her husband acted without her knowledge, and that she should not be punished for her husband's misdeeds.
Macintosh grilled Douglas's husband last month, suggesting it was impossible that Douglas never knew about the nude photos.
With rapid-fire questions, he repeatedly asked King how could Douglas not be alarmed that he was snapping more than 100 pictures of her over the years, with digital, film and instant cameras.
It's not clear when Block or Pratte's applications to the Federal Court might be heard. The inquiry itself is on a break.
It was originally scheduled to finish hearing evidence last month, but most witnesses have yet to testify. The committee had talked about resuming hearings in the fall, although no firm dates have been set.
The Canadian Judicial Council has only held inquiries into judges nine times in 40 years. It has only once recommended that a judge be removed.
In 2009, the council recommended to the federal government that Paul Cosgrove be removed as a justice of the Ontario Superior Court due to incompetence and abuse of his powers.
Cosgrove resigned before the federal government could make its decision.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Another round of legal wrangling has erupted that could derail the inquiry into a Manitoba judge whose nude photos appeared on the internet.
Lori Douglas's lawyer, Sheila Block, filed an application Monday with the Federal Court of Canada to quash the inquiry due to a "reasonable apprehension of bias."
Block alleges that George Macintosh, the lawyer who has been asking questions on behalf of the five-member committee overseeing the inquiry, has engaged in "aggressive and argumentative questions, sexist and insulting references, misstatements and distortions of the evidence and attacks on (Douglas's) character and credibility."
Guy Pratte, the independent lawyer leading the inquiry, filed a similar but separate motion Monday.
He did not ask the Federal Court to end the inquiry, but only to prevent Macintosh from asking any more questions and strike his previous questions from the record.
Pratte said the inquiry committee, which includes the chief justices of Alberta, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador, has over-stepped its bounds by becoming involved in a hearing while also presiding over it.
"The procedure adopted by the committee is beyond its jurisdiction, violates the (Canadian Judicial Council) bylaws and policies and … is inconsistent with the principles of fairness by which the committee is legally bound," Pratte wrote.
The inquiry committee is examining whether Douglas should be removed from the bench. Douglas is an associate chief justice of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, heading up the family court division.
Sexually explicit photos posted
The inquiry is examining a controversy that began when Douglas's husband, Jack King, sexually harassed a client.In 2003, when Douglas and King were family law lawyers at the same firm, King uploaded sexually explicit photos of Douglas on a website dedicated to interracial sex. Some showed her in bondage gear or performing sex acts. He also emailed photos to a client named Alexander Chapman and asked him to have sex with Douglas.
Chapman complained to the law firm and King settled the matter within weeks by paying Chapman $25,000 to return all the photos and to never discuss the matter.
Chapman broke that deal in 2010 and complained to the judicial council, insisting Douglas was part of the sexual harassment.
Among the allegations before the inquiry is that Douglas did not disclose the matter when she applied to be a judge. She applied three times before finally being accepted in 2005.
The inquiry is also examining whether the very existence of the photos precludes Douglas from continuing in her job.
Douglas has said all along that her husband acted without her knowledge, and that she should not be punished for her husband's misdeeds.
Macintosh grilled Douglas's husband last month, suggesting it was impossible that Douglas never knew about the nude photos.
With rapid-fire questions, he repeatedly asked King how could Douglas not be alarmed that he was snapping more than 100 pictures of her over the years, with digital, film and instant cameras.
Lawyer tried to quash inquiry before
Block objected to Macintosh's questions and asked the committee to end the inquiry. The committee rejected that idea and said Macintosh needed to ask questions to get to the truth.It's not clear when Block or Pratte's applications to the Federal Court might be heard. The inquiry itself is on a break.
It was originally scheduled to finish hearing evidence last month, but most witnesses have yet to testify. The committee had talked about resuming hearings in the fall, although no firm dates have been set.
The Canadian Judicial Council has only held inquiries into judges nine times in 40 years. It has only once recommended that a judge be removed.
In 2009, the council recommended to the federal government that Paul Cosgrove be removed as a justice of the Ontario Superior Court due to incompetence and abuse of his powers.
Cosgrove resigned before the federal government could make its decision.
Ruling of the
Inquiry Committee concerning Associate Chief Justice Lori Douglas
Ottawa, 21 August 2012–The Inquiry Committee into the matter of Associate Chief Justice Lori
Douglas has made a ruling with respect to the motion to disqualify all members
of the Inquiry Committee on the basis of alleged reasonable apprehension of
bias. The Ruling is
available on Council's website at www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca.
Contact
Norman Sabourin
Executive Director and Senior General Counsel
(613) 288-1566 ext 302
Norman Sabourin
Executive Director and Senior General Counsel
(613) 288-1566 ext 302
posted by Clare L. Pieuk at 7:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home