Posts

Showing posts with the label justice

Ontario Court of Appeal rules on police access to a press source, declines to take bait on bloggers

I was vaguely kicking around a notion to blog about this ruling in R. v. National Post since the pressing by the police on the boundary of press privilege has become more urgent and more widespread in recent years but fortunately for me (and potential readers of my half-assed take) Dan Michaluk had got there first . Both of the following issues are not going away, however, and I suspect one day soon a Court is going to be forced to tackle them: [98] The Crown submits that in so finding the reviewing judge made two errors. First, it contends that in today’s society we have no principled basis to distinguish between those journalists who are entitled to confidential source relationships and those who are not. Today, many persons, especially by using the internet, may be called “journalists” or “the press” because they disseminate information to the public, yet may not merit the journalist-confidential source privilege. Second, the Crown contends that we should not sedulously...

Wouldn't we all like to be let off the hook?

Myriam Bedard is requesting an unconditional discharge from a charge of abduction so that she can continue as a member of the International Biathlon Committee without the conviction impeding her travel. While she is described by CBC as a volunteer, her stated reason is that so she can "continue to earn a living". She also wants to continue travelling with her daughter. Personally I hope this request is refused - it would be unconscionable to give Bedard a free pass and permit to take her kid abroad when she has proven she will not adhere to her conditions of custody. UPDATE: The judge imposed a conditional discharge , which does involve a criminal record.

Would "internal exile" survive a Charter challenge?

How are we to resolve the situation in respect of sex offenders released at end of sentence? The latest furore is in British Columbia surrounding the case of Thane Moore , recently arrived from the end of his 14 year incarceration in New Brunswick with an assessment of likely violent re-offence. He had been asked by the Mayor of Dawson City, Yukon, not to go ahead with his plan to resettle there. Due to release conditions which forbade him from contact with his victims leaving New Brunswick and PEI was imperative and wisely he didn't choose to give Ontario AG Michael Bryant yet another overwrought media cycle . He then left for his next choice, which under the terms of his release conditions had him accompanied by police officers: When his flight touched down in Vancouver, police arrested him under Section 810 of the Criminal Code, which permits them to arrest someone for a crime they might commit. Interestingly, despite his police escort the BC authorities make it look like Moo...

Chilean soccer fans - get over yourselves or get out of town.

I was out of town over the weekend and while I had heard of the violent incident between Toronto Police and Chilean Under 20 soccer players and the subsequent diplomatic kerfuffle, I expected an investigation to closely query what happened to put our city's international reputation in the spotlight (drawing far more overseas media coverage than the tournament was getting I suspect) and the decision making of the police officers on the scene - this is not the first allegation of police overreaction at BMO Field. However, on the way back into town, 680 News brought us their top story - a bunch of whiners protesting outside the 3rd place playoff game. Heads up boys and girls - Sepp Blatter refused to link this to any future Canadian bid for a FIFA tournament and if FIFA won't pick Chile over Canada we can't have been that far offside. But the infuriating bit was when protesters linked the incident with the policies of Augusto Pinochet : "For many people, even for m...

Good results in Dublin

The judgement for D (a minor) vs Judge Brennan and others isn't on the Courts Service Judgements site yet but: (Mr Justice Liam McKechnie, in the High Court,) said (Miss D) had got devastating news about the health of the baby she was carrying when she went for a scan at 16 weeks’ pregnant and had made a sound moral judgment. She could, Mr Justice Mc Kechnie said, have stayed mute and travelled, or she could have committed perjury by claiming she had suicidal tendencies. Miss D, he said, was determined to seek a resolution. She had shown courage and determination. The decision of the court that she can travel to Britain for an abortion, the judge reminded the courtroom, is not the end of Miss D’s ordeal. Vivian Kilfeather, the Examiner The case was about the right to travel rather than the rights of the unborn child, and only totalitarian regimes prevented freedom of movement for their citizens. News in Brief, The Times ----------------------------------------- The previous day...