Jump to content

Ex-Tory MP Jaffer charged with cocaine possession


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 189
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

as it would appear to showcase the continued false Conservative posturing about "being tough on crime"

Care to explain this? I haven't seen any right of centre poster here celebrate the light sentence have you?

It is canada's left that is at fault for not having passed the more strict legislation long ago. It has all been tied up in committee more then once. remember last summer, when the justice committee was on a cadmin witch hunt rather then working on legislation?

You know what waldorf don't bother responding I already know what you slimy condescending arrogant response will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Jaffer and his lawyer made a deal to give the name of the pusher to the police. Of course, they wouldn't want this to come out and tip off the pusher and probably force Jaffer to have to watch his back. Nicholson has always said they want to pusher and the importers. I hope the media ask Nicholson if he's asked Jaffer were he did get the cocaine and another question what does that say about a member Parliament, his wife, knowing that her hubby is breaking the law??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Jaffer and his lawyer made a deal to give the name of the pusher to the police.

Hmm. Would that be before, or after the Crown Attorney withdrew the charges?

Crown lawyer Marie Balogh said in court the other charges were dropped after a careful review of the case showed there were significant legal issues and no reasonable chance of conviction. She refused to elaborate outside of court.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/03/09/jaffer-case.html

Of course, they wouldn't want this to come out and tip off the pusher and probably force Jaffer to have to watch his back.

Jaffer could always be put under the witness protection program. If he disappears, we'll never know if he was murdered or living with a new identity. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's amazing how the media tries to tie the Tories to this "light" sentence. There's more than one article trying to say how reckless mandatory minimum sentences would be - when a crime such as this would not be considered a mandatory minimum consideration....more especially so if this was a first-time offense. The "outrage" that Canadians are venting over this case just goes to show that ordinary citizens want tougher sentences......and if the opposition will get out of the way, Conservatives will give Canadians what they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have bigger issues and problems in this country then some ex-MP.

We have many issues and many problems in this country. Stuff like this is part and parcel.

If this were an ex_Liberal MP I think you would see a lot of Conservatives expressing opinions about the criminal charges being dropped without proper explanation. I would like to see them speak up about this regardless of Jaffer being one of theirs. Either this is proper for everybody or proper for nobody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have many issues and many problems in this country. Stuff like this is part and parcel.

If this were an ex_Liberal MP I think you would see a lot of Conservatives expressing opinions about the criminal charges being dropped without proper explanation. I would like to see them speak up about this regardless of Jaffer being one of theirs. Either this is proper for everybody or proper for nobody.

I am having the same argument with Shady right now in the US forums. There are rats in every party, Libs, Cons, NDP, Greens, CH anyone of them has their rats. Is it worth burning down the house to kill those rats or should we just try the best we can too get rid of them and have an argument on the issues. I could care less he wasn't an MP at the time he was a private citizen, and should be treated as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an issue of perceptions. Jaffer is a public figure, anyone that has held public office will always be. The perception is that there is a double standard of justice; one for the connected and one for Mr. & Mrs. Everyday Citizen. This is further propagated by the lack of usual screaming about "Liberal" judges, "Liberal" justice by members of the "get tough on crime" Conservatives. It's all very bad optics and, as such, becomes front and center in people's minds. It may not be fair but the Cons will wear this as voters associate the incident with this government. It doesn't help that Guergis just showed (and expected) entitlement at a Halifax airport. One entitlement after another and you know how people react to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, it has nothing too do with his party. There are some terrible people in the Conservative party, just as in the NDP (believe me I was at convention) and the Liberal party. However their are way more who are just great. Can we stop acting like politicians aren't people with out faults or vices. They are and they belong too every party. He didn't misuse tax money, or misuse his office so I could care less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, it has nothing too do with his party. There are some terrible people in the Conservative party, just as in the NDP (believe me I was at convention) and the Liberal party. However their are way more who are just great. Can we stop acting like politicians aren't people with out faults or vices. They are and they belong too every party. He didn't misuse tax money, or misuse his office so I could care less.

There are some awful people in any Party, I agree. But this is not just about the person. It is about what is right for one should be right for all. If the Conservatives continue to act like they think this sentence is fine, after screaming for hardline punitive measures for others then the optics are that there may have been political favours or interference. It won't matter to Joe Public whether it's true or not, it will look plausible (to quote the esteemed Harper mentor Tom Flanagan). And that's what will count.

Either the Conservatives "appear" to be tough on crime for everybody or they will look like they like being entitled.

Edited by Fortunata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The perception is that there is a double standard of justice; one for the connected and one for Mr. & Mrs. Everyday Citizen.

This is true. The "connected", as you put it, always seem to have more money to spend on the best and sharpest lawyers. I would add that if you have a lot of money to pay for a pricey defense, you wouldn't necessarily have to be connected to avail yourself of its benefits.

It may not be fair but the Cons will wear this as voters associate the incident with this government.

Not necessarily. What it could do is further rile the public into wanting stiffer minimum sentences and punishments for certain offences. That could play right into the Conservatives' hand of tougher law and order initiatives.

It doesn't help that Guergis just showed (and expected) entitlement at a Halifax airport. One entitlement after another and you know how people react to that.

No, I don't know how people react to that. The reaction of ordinary people, that is. It's no surprise that Liberal partisans will go to great lengths to link both events and translate them into the Conservatives being self serving and accusing them of double standards. It's all in the game. Rational individuals can separate and differentiate between Guergis' airport escapade from her husband's encounter with the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, it has nothing too do with his party. There are some terrible people in the Conservative party, just as in the NDP (believe me I was at convention) and the Liberal party. However their are way more who are just great. Can we stop acting like politicians aren't people with out faults or vices. They are and they belong too every party. He didn't misuse tax money, or misuse his office so I could care less.

This is a recently ex- TORY MP who voted for mandatory minimum sentences for pot offences. Jaffer belittled the NDP for nominating a candidate who was seen smoking a joint with Marc Emery on pot-tv. He ran attack ads against Jack Layton for daring to suggest cannabis decrim. THe statement of facts agreed to by both parties state that he was going nearly twice the speed limit,and blew over the legal limit of blood alcohol. He was found in possession of cocaine. If the statement of facts state that he was over the limit how exactly could the prosecuter not reasonably expect to convict? Any normal hardworking Canadian making the same "mistake" would have gottten a criminal record for impaired driving, lost their liscence, and have also gotten a record for the cocaine. The Cons are trying to say its a provincial matter but that is BULLSHIT! CDSA if FEDERAL law and would have had a FEDERAL crown prosecuter. Rob Nicholson is ultimately responsible for the dropping of the cocaine charge, because he is the federal "justice" minister. Careless driving??? 500 dollar fine???? WTF??? This doesn't show a need for tougher laws either, the laws allow for very strong sentences already. What this shows is that the laws are only meant to be applied to us peasants while rich, connected assholes get special treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reaction of ordinary people, that is. It's no surprise that Liberal partisans will go to great lengths to link both events and translate them into the Conservatives being self serving and accusing them of double standards. It's all in the game. Rational individuals can separate and differentiate between Guergis' airport escapade from her husband's encounter with the law.

One has nothing to do with the other but they both have connections to the ruling Party. As I said, it may not be fair, but both have the appearance of either having special treatment or wanting special treatment. And being within a week of each other?

By the way it isn't just the "Liberal" partisans you Cons so seem to like to blame for everything, it has everybody other than the "Conservative" partisans talking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"What this shows is that the laws are only meant to be applied to us peasants while rich, connected assholes get special treatment."

Amen.

And it cannot be separated from his own, and his wife's, and their associates' persuit of even greater harshness for 'peasants only'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Care to explain this? I haven't seen any right of centre poster here celebrate the light sentence have you?

It is canada's left that is at fault for not having passed the more strict legislation long ago. It has all been tied up in committee more then once. remember last summer, when the justice committee was on a cadmin witch hunt rather then working on legislation?

Exactly what legislation would you have passed as a Conservative and can you please advise if Harper has any such legislation in his plans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly what legislation would you have passed as a Conservative and can you please advise if Harper has any such legislation in his plans?

That's the uselessness of the whole argument. Conservatives have no plans to toughen sentences except for violent, repeat offenders and drug traffickers. This appears to have been a first time offense that probably deserves a reasonable amount of compassion from the justice system. We have heard nothing from the Conservatives with good reason.....on one hand, they have not come out and said they fully support the result because like many of us, they do not condone his actions. On the other hand, they have not criticized the result because it likely IS a first offense.....and the whole matter was judged by the Ontario Provincial Crown - not the Feds. I think we should continue to focus on the revolving door justice system that lets these actions be repeated over and over and over again. The Opposition has it's pound of flesh...it's time to move on and get back to more serious matters - like the Afghan who was beaten with a shoe by an Afghan jailer 4 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK

I have the car, I can go to my local bar, all I need is an underworld connection to get my 'coke'

Here is to sticking two fingers up to decent society - The justice system makes me sick!!

Was there interference? - more than likely

By whom Liberals or Conservatives?

Liberal reasons for letting this criminal go - To make it look like it was an underhanded effort by the Government to aid one of their own.

Conservatives - Looking after one of their own.

Either way - Prosecutors had evidence of drug possession and DUI - What chance would you have stood if your name was Harry and you worked at Wendy's flipping burgers - Good luck on that one !!!!

I am going to take a pill now and calm down - a legally prescribed one to me I might add.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK

I have the car, I can go to my local bar, all I need is an underworld connection to get my 'coke'

Here is to sticking two fingers up to decent society - The justice system makes me sick!!

Was there interference? - more than likely

By whom Liberals or Conservatives?

Liberal reasons for letting this criminal go - To make it look like it was an underhanded effort by the Government to aid one of their own.

Conservatives - Looking after one of their own.

Either way - Prosecutors had evidence of drug possession and DUI - What chance would you have stood if your name was Harry and you worked at Wendy's flipping burgers - Good luck on that one !!!!

I am going to take a pill now and calm down - a legally prescribed one to me I might add.

I must agree. A cabinet members husband, and former MP gets a very nice break that most of us would never get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone know that the judge was a long time time Conservative, appointed to the bench by none other than Jim Flaherty? Or that the Conservative MP for the riding worked for 20 years in the very Orangeville courthouse that Jaffer got his plea bargain? Also the prosecuter was recently the moderator of a debate on status of women's issues in Orangeville. Who is the minister of state for status of women again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone know that the judge was a long time time Conservative, appointed to the bench by none other than Jim Flaherty? Or that the Conservative MP for the riding worked for 20 years in the very Orangeville courthouse that Jaffer got his plea bargain? Also the prosecuter was recently the moderator of a debate on status of women's issues in Orangeville. Who is the minister of state for status of women again?

I think this is beginning to smell like trouble for Harper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,695
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Linda Teskey
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Yakuda went up a rank
      Experienced
    • QuebecOverCanada went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • Jeary went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Gator earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Jeary earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...