Jump to content

Stanley verdict not to be appealed


cannuck

Recommended Posts

For once, some common sense may prevail in SK

http://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/colten-boushie-shooting-crown-will-not-appeal-in-gerald-stanley-case 

While we can muse over the racial, cultural, political issues, what is at stake is the judicial system working WITHOUT political influence.  Claiming that the jury would not possibly be unbiased because they were white was preposterous.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cannuck said:

For once, some common sense may prevail in SK

As per the article they had no choice since the law dictates that no appeal can happen because the law won't allow for it. I wonder if this is where JT will step in and try to change it so that the law can make it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Accountability Now said:

As per the article they had no choice since the law dictates that no appeal can happen because the law won't allow for it. I wonder if this is where JT will step in and try to change it so that the law can make it happen.

Which is exactly why I posted this on the Federal forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Boges said:

Don't we have Double Jeopardy in Canada? 

Here's what wikipedia says on it:

 

Quote

 

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms includes provisions such as section 11(h) prohibiting double jeopardy. However, this prohibition applies only after an accused person has been "finally" convicted or acquitted. Canadian law allows the prosecution to appeal an acquittal: if the acquittal is thrown out, the new trial is not considered to be double jeopardy, as the verdict of the first trial would have been annulled. In rare circumstances, a court of appeal might also substitute a conviction for an acquittal. This is not considered to be double jeopardy, either – in this case, the appeal and subsequent conviction are deemed to be a continuation of the original trial.

For an appeal from an acquittal to be successful, the Supreme Court of Canada requires that the Crown show that an error in law was made during the trial and that the error contributed to the verdict. It has been suggested that this test is unfairly beneficial to the prosecution. For instance, lawyer Martin Friedland, in his book My Life in Crime and Other Academic Adventures, contends that the rule should be changed so that a retrial is granted only when the error is shown to be responsible for the verdict, not just a factor.

A notable example of this is Guy Paul Morin, who was wrongfully convicted in his second trial after the acquittal in his first trial was vacated by the Supreme Court of Canada.

In the Guy Turcotte case, for instance, the Quebec Court of Appeal overturned Turcotte's not criminally responsible verdict and ordered a second trial after it found that the judge committed an error in the first trial while giving instructions to the jury. Turcotte was later convicted of second-degree murder in the second trial.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Please name names, and quote exactly what they said.

It has been said thousands of times, but not well covered by media with no balls to deal with the real issues.   If you listen to Alvin Baptiste at the 0.54 time of this link, you will hear it once:  http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/gerald-stanley-colten-boushie-verdict-1.4526313   First nations are treated just as anyone else is when a jury is selected.  There are no special "white juries", there are only juries who have passed the selection process set out in the law for EVERYONE.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/colten-boushie-shooting-case-jury-selection-gerald-stanley-1.4506931  Once, more, the guarded words in front of the camera is NOT what you will hear them saying in real life, but comes close enough.   This also points out the jury selection process that was and is used.   As you might be able to gather from such a large pool there WAS a problem with jury bias - thus why many of the potential jurors could be challenged and rejected by the defense attorny.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/enough-colten-boushie-s-mom-speaks-out-at-rally-1.3798132   Here you can once again hear the carefully coached words of Debbie Baptiste and Bobby Cameron.   It is NOT how carefully they avoid this in person without the cameras.

I agree that aboriginal culture is distinct and very different from the ROC, but the trial of Gerald Stanley was about a crime - actually just one of several crimes on that day in that location, not a culture.

I have mentioned before, and will repeat for empahsis: if you want to see how the criminal justice system in Saskatchewan treats aboriginal offenders vs. non-aboriginals, have a good read about two people here who killed 5 others at about the same time in the same manner.  One, an aborigianl woman killed an entire family, and is now enjoying a country club atmospher at a healing lodge.   The other, a young white make killed one man is languishing in a Federal penitentiary.

https://regina.ctvnews.ca/colby-heid-sentenced-to-3-years-in-impaired-driving-death-of-tanner-kaufmann-1.3468453

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/van-de-vorst-family-outraged-after-drunk-driver-catherine-mckay-sent-to-healing-lodge-1.3997984

I understand that your zealot status within the politcially correct community means you can not deal with facts or reality, but do yourself a favour, pull your head out of your ass and look around.

some guarded words by others on the subject:   

The report called Manitoba's jury system a "glaring example of systemic discrimination" and called for peremptory challenges to be eliminated.

Murray Sinclair, Manitoba's first Indigenous judge and now a senator, co-chaired the inquiry. He tweeted about the Stanley trial last week.

"Without Indigenous people on the jury, how will they understand?" he wrote.

His son Niigaan Sinclair, a professor of native studies at the University of Manitoba, said Indigenous jurors bring history and experience into a room. He suggests all jurors undergo some sort of educational training before a trial starts.

"The situation in Saskatchewan demands competency in understanding the relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples, and I would say that, on the whole, Canadians are not adequately prepared for the complexities of the past 150 years," he said.

"Understanding the Indian Act, understanding how Canada has been built off the exploitation of Indigenous peoples and resources ... all of that goes into the (killing) of Colten Boushie."

Toronto lawyer Jessica Orkin said problems with Canada's jury system can't be solved with one fix.

She represented an Aboriginal man, Clifford Kokopenace, in his battle over jury fairness before the Supreme Court in 2015. Kokopenace was convicted of manslaughter but argued the verdict wasn't by a jury of his peers.

The Appeal Court ordered a retrial but the Supreme Court ruled the province had done an adequate job of trying to get Indigenous people on the list of potential jurors.

Each province is responsible for sending notices for jury duty. In Ontario, Orkin said, it's done using names on municipal and property rolls. Other provinces use driver's licences and health records.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, PIK said:

Natives will never admit that they to are a big part of their problems, and nothing will change until they change.

That has been the attitude for over a century, and inspired the idea of residential schools to force "change" on Natives.  I am glad that at least some of us have recognized that change starts with us.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

That has been the attitude for over a century, and inspired the idea of residential schools to force "change" on Natives.  I am glad that at least some of us have recognized that change starts with us.   

What change? You want to give natives bigger welfare cheques. So what? That's not going to change anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

That has been the attitude for over a century, and inspired the idea of residential schools to force "change" on Natives.  I am glad that at least some of us have recognized that change starts with us.   

You are very right, WE (the royal white and other race, tax paying majority) ARE the problem.  By simply giving out literally BILLION$$$$$$ of unaccountable dollars to keep aboriginals out of work especially on reserve, and perpetuating this by building an "Indian Industry" or bureaucrats and consultants who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, we are indeed part of the problem.   The solution is very simple:   stop paying.   THEN (and only then) will the aboriginal population look to its leadership to lead, not just to pander to the "I.I." for their share of the funding that is pouring out of Ottawa daily.  (for reference, when I last had a chance to look at this in detail, something like 30% of all of the money going through IAF/INAC etc. ever saw a living, breathing aboriginal, and the vast majority of that ended up in Chief and council's hands, not the general population - and virtually NONE of that in hands of disabled, as that was what we working with).  When you have unemployment rates (on reserve) of 90+%, and then the only jobs being make-believe ones with the band council, it should be telling you (and all of the rest of Canada) that there indeed IS a huge problem with the aboriginal population.   Instead of having them participate in the economy of Canada, we continue to mraginalize and ghetoize by just throwing more of the same money at the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@cannuck.  Changing the way we deal with First Nations may include encouraging more direct participation in the economy and less remaining on reserves with little or no prospects for employment or improvement of one's prospects.  But I think the solution is more complex than simply "stop giving them money".   I am not saying I know what the entire solution would look like, but I think it starts with acknowledging the manner in which the government, and by extension Canadians, treated them in the past helped in creating the problems they face today.   Respecting their culture, honoring the promises we made so long ago is another important step.  The simplicity of 'lazy buggers just want money' ignores the very real effects of decades of being considered second class citizens.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

@cannuck.  Changing the way we deal with First Nations may include encouraging more direct participation in the economy and less remaining on reserves with little or no prospects for employment or improvement of one's prospects.  But I think the solution is more complex than simply "stop giving them money".   I am not saying I know what the entire solution would look like, but I think it starts with acknowledging the manner in which the government, and by extension Canadians, treated them in the past helped in creating the problems they face today.   Respecting their culture, honoring the promises we made so long ago is another important step.  The simplicity of 'lazy buggers just want money' ignores the very real effects of decades of being considered second class citizens.  

There are HUGE efforts made at getting aboriginal workers trained and hired in the North and South.  Our institutions often do no different from what we do financially:  award certification/graduation based upon some special privilege according to race.  I could cite dozens of examples going back decades (teacher's programmes one of the worst, but even in things such as colleges of medicine or vetmed, there are seats reserved EXCLUSIVELY for aboriginals, who get that seat not on merit, but on race ).  It is no different from just sending a cheque to the band office and hoping for the best.  While the population at large has bent over backwards to "include" aboriginals, it is usually an effort by some government entity, thus a special privilege granted without any due regard for merit.  That is not inclusion, that is more racist pandering by bureaucrats and hangers-on in the Indian Industry maintaining the status quo (and thus their funding).

Not EVERY programme is quite that bad - the story changes with location, band by band, person by person, but the undlying theme is always the same - just grant a special privilege as you would do for any other lobby or special interest group.   That is doing nobody any favours.  As I feel I should remind people when discussing this: my wife and children are eligible for status - just that doing so in pursuit of academia or career is totally offensive to them - since they understand the difference between merit and special privilege.

BTW:  "WE" didn't make those promises to anyone living today.  The Slimey Limeys did - and check out the population base and actual provisions of WHAT was promised in those treaties.

Edited by cannuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, cannuck said:

.

BTW:  "WE" didn't make those promises to anyone living today.  The Slimey Limeys did - and check out the population base and actual provisions of WHAT was promised in those treaties.

Our country made those promises.  If its a virtue to "take responsibility" then lets do that instead of trying to squirm out of it.

I have a friend who works with the fed gov in treaty negotiations and settlements.  The First Nations took our country to court and won.  I understand that in this, the wearing of hijab or niqab, and in the Khadr case, some people would prefer the courts ignore our own laws.  I prefer that when we, through our government, break our own laws and someone is screwed over that they have recourse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cannuck said:

You are very right, WE (the royal white and other race, tax paying majority) ARE the problem.  By simply giving out literally BILLION$$$$$$ of unaccountable dollars to keep aboriginals out of work especially on reserve, and perpetuating this by building an "Indian Industry" or bureaucrats and consultants who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, we are indeed part of the problem.

You are right that the rich white lawyers and consultants and their shareholders do manage to get a large chuck of money, as they do in many other circumstances. That is a problem with white European business culture, not the North American aboriginals. Perhaps the Europeans should return to their homeland, and they would only have responsibility for cleaning up the environmental mess they have left behind.

6 hours ago, cannuck said:

It has been said thousands of times, but not well covered by media with no balls to deal with the real issues.

Yes, the uncle of the boy murdered did have harsh words. As you point out however you have failed to find anyone who claimed a biased jury because they are white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Accountability Now said:

So what's the problem with having an all white jury if there is no concern with bias? 

The problem is the systematic elimination of first nations representatives on all juries. We no longer have a jury of peers because the system works against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Accountability Now said:

Why? Because the color of their skin is white? I have a black neighbor...is he not my peer?

If all blacks in your neighbourhood are excluded from his trial, especially considering 50% of those randomly selected originally were black, then he would have the same problem. If that happened time, and time, and time, and time, and time, and time again then it is a systemic problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

If all blacks in your neighbourhood are excluded from his trial, especially considering 50% of those randomly selected originally were black, then he would have the same problem. If that happened time, and time, and time, and time, and time, and time again then it is a systemic problem.

You’re avoiding my question. Is my black neighbor one of my peers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Yes, the uncle of the boy murdered did have harsh words. As you point out however you have failed to find anyone who claimed a biased jury because they are white.

Every one of those citations were very clearly saying just that.  Go to a reserve and have a conversation with ANYONE there, and you will hear those words very, very clearly (of course, until the camera shows up).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

The problem is the systematic elimination of first nations representatives on all juries. We no longer have a jury of peers because the system works against them.

The problem is that juries are selected by the law, and aboriginals either don't bother to show up for selection or don't meet selection criteria.  It is the same process, the same rules for EVERYONE who goes to court.  Claiming that someone has some special privilege to have a jury that is racially to their liking is racist BS at its best.

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.


  • Similar Content

  • Tell a friend

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

    • Total Members
      10,696
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    newworldorder2024
    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...