TimG Posted January 22, 2016 Report Posted January 22, 2016 Everyone who is found not guilty doesn't suffer a malicious prosecution. Just because the complainants were feminists doesn't mean that the case shouldn't have been brought forward.There was no evidence of words that would be considered actionable in any other context. The entire case was premised on the idea that responding to someone's ideas in a public forum is 'harassment' if these responses were not desired. In any case, I stated above that I did NOT think the prosecution met the criteria for malicious prosecution only that the Crown was incompetent. Quote
ironstone Posted January 23, 2016 Report Posted January 23, 2016 This whole case sounds bogus to me.These ladies want the right to not be offended by anyone.On the other hand,if they pursued this through the Human Rights tribunals,they would very likely have won their case. Quote "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Thomas Sowell
Michael Hardner Posted January 23, 2016 Report Posted January 23, 2016 Threads have been merged. Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Big Guy Posted January 23, 2016 Report Posted January 23, 2016 (moved from the world section) Deemed inappropriate by whom? I believe that the recent court decision set the precedent that because a person "feels" harassed does not mean they are being harassed. If a young lady is swimming in a pool and 3 black guys walk in can she ask them to leave because she "feels" afraid and uncomfortable with blacks? Or a black woman in a pool with three white guys? Actually in Elliot's case, it is acceptable to harass under some conditions: "In Elliott’s case, the judge found Elliott was harassing the women by repeatedly tweeting them and that he knew they were harassed. He found, however, that Elliott’s actions failed to reach the level of criminal harassment, because it was not reasonable, on the facts of the case, for Guthrie and Reilly to fear for their safety, physical or psychological." The only manual that is in play is that it is a public place giving equal access to all members of the public who are following the law. I do not know what your criteria is for the difference. Please share it so we see if we are on the same planet. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Big Guy Posted January 23, 2016 Report Posted January 23, 2016 Had another thought. What if I am eating in public restaurant and a person near to me begins to breast feed her baby. If I find that uncomfortable and unappetizing do I have the right to ask her to leave, to stop or ask the waiter to move her? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Recommended Posts
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.