Railroad Forum ... sightings, credits, history ... a little treat for BC Rail buffs.
With a BC Rail video: the treacherous climb at 2.2% up through the desert out of Lillooet, BC.
It wasn't the BC premier who stepped forward to reassure the public. It wasn't Canada's Prime Minister who behaved like a statesman, either. Both these guys (Campbell and Martin) waited many days before ambling back from their Christmas holiday and shrugged, "I know nothing," leaving the stunned public as nothing more than part of the devastation.
And, like I say, some "crimes" against the common good are never prosecuted, such as failing to publish the truth and avoiding unfair bias in reporting news events. There are other savage crimes against the public interest which do get prosecuted and go unreported ... Click HERE for "Jasmohan Singh Bains sentenced to 9 years".
So Happy New Year to those who, like Sgt John Ward and like Grant Gough and you, me, all of us who keep asking what happened to the big railway we once owned, and to the splendid BC Hydro authority, and to our own BC Ferries ... and that whole long list of similar, mysterious economic tragedies.
If this era is so golden, so great ... tell us the details: how did it happen that we lost the railway, the power generator, the section of our highways known as BC Ferries ... all of it. - BC Mary.
at the turning of the day.
We absolutely must hear this BC Rail trial explained under oath. Picture it. Imagine it. Hope for it. Make it real, make it happen.
That's my New Year wish for us all.
December 28, 2009 is the 6th anniversary of the historic police raid on the BC Legislature. Such a breach of parliament had never happened before in the British Commonwealth of nations.
By Dec. 28, 2007, it was common knowledge that the Basi Virk Basi trial was being bungled. The normally mild-mannered Paul Willcocks headlined his 4th anniversary column this way: "Police, prosecutors look bad in raid case". Read Paul's column HERE.
Voice-on-Line was more blunt: "Basi-Virk case: Does the prosecution know what it's doing? The prosecution seems to be screwing up big-time in the so-called BC legislature raid case ... which was supposed to start June 5, 2006 ..." Read that HERE.
The thing is, journalists and bloggers have had to be cautious. If we spoke openly about our doubts and fears in the BC Rail Case, we risked being sued for libel if we couldn't show proof. Well ... how could we show proof? The old laws seemed designed to keep us quiet.
Certainly we knew Gordon Campbell's government lost a big railroad, crippled a dazzling Hydro corporation, dealt off ownership of the BC Ferries corporation, and much more.
Most of us knew that the media let Gordo get by without scrutiny ... their excuse being that they might be sued for "libel" but also because we believe big media protected the Gordo Gang.
That's what has always made the Basi Virk Basi trial so important ... yes, it's all about BC Rail ... but yes, it's also all about things we couldn't talk freely about. Hearing the evidence under oath, will be our first opportunity to hear how BC Rail actually slid from our hands and into private pockets ... nobody could charge us with libel for reporting that.
But with the New Year 2010, it gets better. All that fear is brushed aside.
In determining whether a publication is on a matter of public interest, the judge must consider the subject matter of the publication as a whole. The defamatory statement should not be scrutinized in isolation. To be of public interest, the subject matter must be shown to be one inviting public attention, or about which the public, or a segment of the public, has some substantial concern because it affects the welfare of citizens, or one to which considerable public notoriety or controversy has attached.
Does that spell "BC Rail" or what.
Terrace Daily Online explains that now, for the first time, they can expose a certain letter (now before the courts) showing that Gordo was at work on a backroom deal intended to double-cross the Haisla Nation, BC Hydro and the watchdog BC Utilities Commission. It is part of a court case ongoing in Terrace, B.C. It's good to read the Terrace daily online info here. I recommend it.
And so, from New Year's Eve 2010 onward, the media big and small, should feel free to do better work.
From Day One, 6 years ago, I had no doubt that Gordon Campbell himself -- in charge of British Columbia's government -- got rid of BC Rail on terms which caused police to come running. Nor was I surprised that Organized Crime was part of this police alarm ... not with 135 Organized Crime groups in B.C. (900 identifiable crime groups in Canada).
I haven't the slightest doubt that Gordo exerted strong personal influence over the decision to sell BC Rail, and continued to exert his influence over the way in which BC Rail was sold.
Therefore, my New Year's wish for British Columbia 6 years later, is that as the Basi Virk Basi trial gets to the truth of that transaction, the presiding judge and/or the defence team will force full disclosure.
My New Year's wish for British Columbia under the new libel ruling, includes Gordon Campbell himself becoming the proper subject of full disclosure as the trial goes forward. Enough with the sheltering protection. No public figure is more deserving of cross-examination.
There's much more to Gordo's giveaway of BC Rail than meets the eye. And once we know what happened to BC Rail, we'll know what happened in every other major loss which befell BC Crown corporations in the past 9 years.
It's in the public interest to be fully informed of that. - BC Mary.
I counted. There were, in total including the three engines...176 rolling stock. We all know what has happened in the past when CN hauls long lines of railcars through BC mountain passes.
How many boxcars and oil tankers make up this incredible train ... click HERE to see it on the Ontario-Quebec border.
On a bitterly cold winter day (-22C windchill) and filmed with bare hands with no tripod as the photographer rushed out of his car to capture this train on video ... British Columbia Railway 4641, a Dash 9-44CWL built in 1995, Illinois Central 1001, an SD70 built in 1995, and CN 2616, a Dash 9-44CW built in 2000, lead a long Canadian National freight train west from the Province of Quebec into the Province of Ontario.
This train had made a stop at Coteau Quebec but was seen building up speed in anticipation of its trip down the old Kingston Subdivision to Toronto.
British Columbia Railway 4641, was the first Dash 9-44CWL in its class for that railway. Illinois Central 1001 was the second SD70 built in its class for that railway. CN 2616...well...she was 14th built Dash 9-44CW for CN in the year 2000.
Did you see the two Pan Am Railways boxcars in the train consist? Pan Am lives.....but not as the airline I [the photographer] remember it as. Now it's a railroad based in North Billerica MA.
Noted in passing: Click HERE for evidence that CN destroys boxcars but no evidence anywhere (so far as I know) as to whether CN added the promised 600 new boxcars to the former BCR fleet ... as part of the unpopular deal to "sell" BC Rail to CN. That CN promise to buy 600 new boxcars was one of the deal-breakers which should have come up for review on the 5th anniversary of the deal. Maybe the review is before the courts as the "Basi Virk Basi" trial.
BC Mary says: I hope somebody counts these rail-cars. There must be 150 or 200 of them? In British Columbia, flat-lands like this are rare. I couldn't help thinking of BC Rail's knowledge (when we still owned BC Rail) of how best to navigate challenging territory such as mountain-sides, valleys, and rivers' edges.
Riding BC Rail: Bygone Days of the "Cariboo Prospector"
On October 31, 2002, Canada's rugged British Columbia province lost its last regularly scheduled Vancouver–Prince George passenger train, and tourists lost one of the most scenic rides in North America. To me, there is nothing that soothes the soul so much as a long train ride through lonesome country. To experience such a ride, and to share that experience with your fellow travelers, is to encounter the meaning of a journey. We've already lost too many of these trains; at least for me, this was one I've preserved in brain cells and digital bits. - YouTube 2000, 2005. Daniel B. Zukowski.
Three former government aides accused in the Basi-Virk corruption case are applying to have their criminal charges stayed on the grounds of an unreasonable delay in getting to trial.
The application before B.C. Supreme Court Justice Anne MacKenzie is expected to be heard when court resumes Jan. 11.
The judge also rejected a request by the defence that the court review 427 so-called source witness debriefings that have not been disclosed and were at the centre of a battle that landed in the Supreme Court of Canada and delayed the protracted case by two years.
Vancouver - Notes RCMP investigators made while debriefing secret informants in a political corruption case can be withheld by the Crown, the Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled.
In a brief statement Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie dismissed applications by the lawyers defending Dave Basi, Bob Virk and Aneal Basi on charges of fraud, breach of trust and money laundering. The three former government employees allegedly traded in confidential information concerning the $1-billion sale of B.C. Rail in 2003.
The defence had sought more complete disclosure of 21 police reports that have already been released in a heavily redacted form, and to have the court review 427 source debriefing reports that the Crown has been withholding because the material could identify informants, or is irrelevant.
The court was thinly populated. No Michael Bolton, no William Berardino, no Kevin McCullough, no Joseph Doyle. Five lawyers in court. Two "mainstream media journalists". Two other observers in the gallery.
The reason was clear. Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie was arriving to deliver her decision on the Defence application for disclosure of miscellaneous redacted documents and 427 source witness reports (involving, I believe, briefing notes by officers involved with the informers who have claimed "informer privilege" over much of the material).
We sat the other day some hours as Ms. Winteringham (for the Special Crown Prosecutorial team) went through "redacted" documents in which only she and Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie could see what was being discussed - the "redacted" parts.
The word "redacted" is one of those words that is badly chosen and badly used. It is, in fact, a cover-up word. It's correct meaning is "edited, prepared for publication". The courts have mangled the word to make it mean "material that has been blanked out in a text so it can't be read". It would be much closer to the court's meaning if the word chosen was "censored", then the public would know the material is not edited, not revised, not re-written, not re-organized, but censored, blacked out.
When Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm "redacted" and "released" the search warrants from the famous legislature and other location "raids" of December 28, 2003 - all he did was to blacken about 80% of the text to protect people that I believe (under standard search warrant protocols) were not entitled to be so "protected". The public's right-to-know and right to "participate" in the administration of justice in British Columbia is under unceasing attack. Mr. Dohm's "redaction", I believe, constituted just such an attack by withholding material the public has a right to examine.
With Dohm's censored search warrants we saw a piece of the iceberg below the water line - the tip of that iceberg being the RCMP announcement on the day of the search warrant raids (before any of the gathered material could be examined) that no elected official was being (or would be) investigated. The announcement, we know, was just short of a lie because up until December 12, then Finance Minister Gary Collins was under investigation and surveillance (the Defence counsel insist).
"Redaction" in the Basi, Virk, and Basi matter has very often been, I believe, a sign of the class war that is being fought over the wrongdoing involved in the corrupt transfer of BC Rail to CNR: "the BC Rail Scandal".
To put the matter crudely (the most precise way to put it in this case), three cabinet aides appointed, in fact, by Gordon Campbell are charged with (variously) 14 counts of fraud, breach of trust, and money laundering as part of a mammoth set of highly dubious, complex, and wide-ranging manipulations, transactions, negotiations, misrepresentations, and - finally - falsifications that constitute "the BC Rail Scandal". That mammoth scenario could not have been master-minded and carried forward by the three men charged - but they are the only ones against whom accusations of criminal wrongdoing have been brought in relation to the scenario. Their counsel insist they are not guilty as charged.
Today's appearance of Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie and her decision on the application for disclosure by the Defence counsel was I believe another (extremely important) clash in that class war.
Put briefly: one force wishes to convey to the British Columbia public that an alleged criminal wrong-doing in the transfer of BC Rail to CNR occurred when the three men charged (cabinet aides) engaged in alleged illegal actions. Those three - the force says - did criminal acts and no one else did in that transfer. Embarrassingly, that "force" appears to be made up of what one might properly speak of as "power" in British Columbia, the "Establishment" in British Columbia, what the Left would call "the ruling class".
In the terminology of "Class": the "Establishment", and "the ruling class" refer to the corporate capitalists, the political party in power, the (so-called) "mainstream press and media", the upper ranks of police forces, the courts, and the legal 'establishment' that serves those others.
The divide - that first showed itself as a crack in the surface when the announcement was made that no elected officials were under investigation in the BC Rail Scandal - has spread now to the size and depth, at least, of the Fraser Canyon.
It may be that Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett stepped down from the case for that reason. She did NOT "recuse herself". She had no visible conflict of interest that would make her "recuse herself". Visibly, she freely and voluntarily - seeking her own pleasure - stepped away. And, visibly, she was replaced by Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie.
Invisibly, some might say, 'the ruling class' decided Elizabeth Bennett was allowing the Defence altogether too much room to (A) point to the divide between 'the ruling class' and the accused three men. She was, some might say, (B) permitting a Defence program and policy that more and more and more pointed to the possibility of wrongdoing among the "Establishment", among members of "the ruling class". Some might suggest (C) that the wrongdoings pointed at might well be criminal wrongdoings. When Defence counsel claimed that cabinet materials, BC Rail management materials, RCMP records and briefing notes, etc. were important to the defence of their clients, Madam Justice Bennett said something like: "Well, let's look at them to see if they are, indeed, relevant." And many of them were found to be relevant to the the conduct of the defence of the accused men - and Madam Justice Bennett admitted them to be used as evidence if required.
All the while the people of British Columbia were being given a look at the extraordinary set of actions by the Gordon Campbell government which - against the people's wishes - transferred "their" railway to a private corporate entity now in fact headquartered in the U.S.A. Some people connected to the Gordon Campbell government might, moreover - the people of British Columbia began to see - just have done it in a way that involved criminal behaviour.
Since Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie has taken over as presiding judge on the Basi, Virk, and Basi case nothing that the Defence counsel has sought - as far as I know - has been granted by her. A spokesperson for her and Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm has even refused to supply me with a professional resume for her - the judge sitting on the most important criminal trial concerning public affairs in British Columbia's history. Her record of work as a judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia I was told - in effect - is none of my business.
It may not come as a complete surprise to readers that Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie took something less than seven minutes this morning to dismiss both parts of the Defence application for disclosure (to give reasons later). She based her dismissal, for the most part, on the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in the Stinchcombe case (1991). All that needs to be said about it is that "Stinchcombe" sets the terms for disclosure of materials to the Defence. Primarily, Mr. Justice Sopinka, for the Supreme Court of Canada, made clear that evidence in the hands of the Crown is "the property of the public to ensure justice is done". It is not the personal holding of the Crown and so it must be released to Defence in most instances.
The Crown may delay the disclosure. On that basis, I believe, Madam Justice MacKenzie announced her decision today. Defence had argued that, under a ruling by Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett, the Crown cannot unilaterally decide what is relevant to the case for the Defence. Stinchcombe supports that view. Ms. Winteringham, however, claimed irrelevance of material (ostensibly for all concerned). Madam Justice MacKenzie could have reviewed the material right away for relevance. She could have said: "Well let's look at those documents to see if they are, indeed, relevant to the defence of the accused". Instead, she decided to dismiss the application - which doesn't prevent it from being re-born later.
The next meeting of the court on the Basi, Virk, and Basi matter will be held on January 11, 2010. Still to be heard are Defence applications on wire-taps, delay of proceedings, abuse of process, reelection to jury, and change of venue from Vancouver to somewhere else for the trial. All of those matters, however, may take different shape in the next weeks and a wholly different schedule appear before or on January 11, 2010.
Very special thanks to Robin Mathews for his very special reports. This will be his last column for 2009. I believe that Robin Mathews is providing us with a unique set of observations of a trial-event unique in British Columbia. Let's hope that he will be sending us reports on the trial itself in 2010. Happy New Year, Robin. - BC Mary.
And the reason for today's hearing is given as "JMT" which, in the clear-as-mud terminology of BC Supreme Court listings, is code for "Judgment".
"Clearly there are overtones and undertones of very significant political involvement in this case."
to file a health care costs recovery action against the tobacco industry. Several other provinces expressed an interest in following BC's lead.
The plan was to sue the wealthy tobacco companies for the health costs of treating victims of cigarette smoking. I remember that time. Everyone said the province would never win against the wealthy tobacco companies. But they did.
The province of British Columbia was represented at the Court by Thomas Berger, O.C., Q.C., Daniel Webster, Q.C., Elliott Myers, Q.C., and Craig Jones of Bull, Housser & Tupper.
Counsel for the tobacco industry defendants included: Jack Giles, Q.C., Jeffrey Kay, and Dylana Bloor of Farris for JTI-Macdonald Corp., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco International, Inc.; Richard Sugden, Q.C., and Craig Dennis of Sugden, McFee & Roos for British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd.; William Berardino, Q.C., David Harris, and Andrea MacKay of Berardino & Harris for Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd.; James Macaulay, Q.C., and Ken Affleck, Q.C., of Macaulay McColl for Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc.; Ross Clark and Cyndi Millar of Davis & Company for Philip Morris Inc. and Philip Morris International Inc.; and Loryl Russell of L.D. Russell & Company for the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers' Council.
That's right. In that trial, our Special Prosecutors for the BC Rail Case -- Bill Berardino, Andrea MacKay -- were counsel for Imperial Tobacco. They were the part of the defence team and the BC Government was the prosecution. David & Goliath ... or more likely: Goliath & David. Imagine Berardino in a head-on battle against the BC government.
The Supreme Court of Canada promotes open access, but are the lower courts following its lead?
I found this article while searching for background information about Supreme Court Justice Anne MacKenzie. It does talk about her a little, yes, but more interestingly it talks about the difficulties of finding out what happens in courtrooms ... about something called "the open court principle" ... and the media's role in making the courts open, and understandable. I couldn't help but think of Robin Mathews, who (without assistance, without pay) attends most hearings then puts his great intellect to work understanding and explaining the trial. As part of those efforts, Robin has battled the issue of obtaining court transcripts, or police investigations, or in fact, the curriculum vitae of the judge who presides over the most important trial ever to come before a high court in British Columbia. - BC Mary.
When the trial of three alleged Hells Angels members resumes this week in the Vancouver Law Courts, an observer of the proceeding need only take a few steps outside the fifth-floor courtroom to look through the sloping glass roof that distinguishes the Arthur Erickson-designed building.
From an architectural standpoint, the building conforms to the view of the Supreme Court of Canada that "the administration of justice thrives on exposure to light -- and withers under a cloud of secrecy," as it said in a 2006 decision.
However, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Anne MacKenzie has thrown the equivalent of a judicial tarp over the glass by issuing a publication ban on the entire trial, which she is hearing without a jury.
Citing "the inherent jurisdiction of the court," she issued the ban in a one-sentence ruling.
As a result, the public will not learn about the second of four trials connected to a multi-million-dollar RCMP investigation into the activities of the Hells Angels in B.C. that was dubbed E-Pandora.
Nearly 20 people were arrested in July, 2005, following an investigation the RCMP described as a "national priority" and which involved the controversial use of an alleged steroid trafficker and "enforcer" as a police agent.
For nearly 100 years the Supreme Court of Canada has stressed the importance of truly open court proceedings. In the past 25 years, the principle has been strengthened by the high court, requiring real evidence of a risk to a trial to justify a ban or restrictions on access to public documents.
The lower courts are bound by these principles, yet trial judges often manage to find the exception to these rules.
While the ban imposed by Judge MacKenzie is unusually sweeping, the instinct to issue publication restrictions is not uncommon among her fellow judges in B.C. and in other parts of the country.
The constant tension between the media asserting the public's right to know and a judge's inclination to hold back information if it could potentially have a negative impact on a trial is in sharp contrast to established practices in U.S. courts.
Even in states where cameras are not allowed in the courts, public documents in both criminal and civil proceedings can often be accessed online. It is very rare for judges to impose publication bans at any stage of a criminal trial and jurors are permitted to talk about deliberations and how they reached their verdict. In Canada, the situation is quite different.
"The vast majority [in Canada] pay lip service to the open court principles, but they are resistant," said Michael Skene, a Vancouver lawyer who often acts for the media. "The law has changed and unfortunately many judges have not changed with it."
If courts are truly open, which includes granting access to exhibits that may be broadcast by the media, "the public can make informed comment about the process," Mr. Skene said.
He pointed to the release of the amateur video that showed Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski when he was Tasered by police at Vancouver airport in October.
The incident led to a public outcry over the use of Tasers by police.
If the video had not been released and the officers had faced criminal charges, Mr. Skene said it likely would have been difficult for the media to obtain a copy to broadcast because of speculation that it could impact the right to a fair trial.
But in one of the few rulings that have touched on a jury's obligations, Ontario Superior Court Justice Brian Trafford explained why he decided to allow certain pre-trial information to be published in the notorious Just Desserts murder trial in Toronto.
"Jurors in our society are intelligent persons who are capable of ignoring irrelevant information in accordance with the instructions of the trial judge," said Judge Trafford in the 1997 decision.
"They are presumed to act in accordance with the oath administered to them," he wrote.
Judge Trafford is considered to be one of the top judges in Ontario on the issue of adhering to the open court principle.
But many of his colleagues often invoke an unspecified fear of the jury being tainted to deny or delay access to exhibits during trials, especially in a high-profile proceeding.
The more than three-dozen rulings that Justice James Williams issued during the recent trial of Robert Pickton, many of which had to do with whether certain evidence would be admissible, are still subject to a publication ban. A videotaped police interrogation of Pickton when he was arrested in 2002, also has not been made public.
Another judge is expected to hear submissions from the media on this issue in late January.
Pickton was convicted on Dec. 9 of six counts of second-degree murder and faces a second trial on 20 more murder charges.
The belief that the release of rulings and exhibits might jeopardize Pickton's right to a fair trial on the other charges is "completely artificial," Mr. Skene suggested.
There are academic studies that show pre-trial publicity does not affect a defendant's right to a fair trial, said Edmonton lawyer Fred Kozak, who frequently represents the media.
True public access means the media should be able to show "what you would see and hear if you were in the courtroom," he said.
The concept of access requires "timely access," Mr. Kozak also said.
In the recent trial of a Toronto police officer acquitted of assaulting an anti-poverty protester, Ontario Superior Court Justice Frank Newbould would not deal with media requests for a key videotaped exhibit during the trial. He ultimately released the tape, which had been seen by the jury, after its verdict was issued.
These types of delays are common and are a "practical obscurity" to the open courts principle, Mr. Kozak said.
While there may be resistance among some judges to the open-courts principle, especially in Ontario and B.C., Mr. Kozak suggested there has been progress, especially in Alberta.
Media are routinely granted access to exhibits in criminal trials in the province.
As well, the mandatory ban on publication of bail hearing proceedings was found to be unconstitutional in 2007, by Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Justice Scott Brooker.
The Alberta government is appealing the decision.
Mr. Kozak, who acted for the Edmonton Journal in the case, said it makes no sense to ban reporting on bail hearings when 95% of criminal trials are ultimately heard by a judge alone.
"If you were to ask, what determines whether someone gets out on bail, no one would have a clue, because we can't tell readers about the bail process," Mr. Kozak said. "It creates speculation and mistrust of the justice system."
The obligation to inform the public is one of the reasons the Criminal Justice Branch in B.C. created the role of Communications Counsel, which is unique among the provinces.
Stan Lowe, a senior prosecutor, is Communications Counsel with duties that include responding to media requests for information about specific cases. Mr. Lowe will also attend high-profile proceedings, so there is someone to speak on behalf of the Crown.
"We believe we have an obligation to inform the public of our decisions, educate the public as to our role and the justice system as a whole," Mr. Lowe said. "The adage 'if people want to know about a case, they should come to court' is unrealistic and not acceptable," he said.
The frequently invoked theme that the "justice system has failed," especially in reporting on notorious criminal cases, would be less common if the courts were more open, Mr. Kozak said.
"For the most part, our justice system works very well. Why wouldn't you want the public to know that?"
With considerably better humour than yesterday, argument continued today about the disclosure application focussed on yesterday. Mr. McCullough for the Defence opened the day by discussing the apparent disagreement concerning the process of coming (or failing to come) to disclosure.
Defence and presiding judge appeared to be of one mind about the differences (and - apparent - confusion) that occurred.
Ms. Winteringham for the Special Crown Prosecutorial team went through more documents and made a case for withholding disclosure. She said the Federal prosecutor's report on the wire-taps is available to the Defence. Essentially she argued that the materials were reviewed by more than one agency - one being a federal prosecutor.
Citing precedent, she asserted that application for disclosure was not to be "a fishing expedition" by Defence (in what might be a blind attempt to pull in anything possible and then have a look at it). She said also that, by precedent, material denied at one point might be disclosed at another. The Crown also holds that the application for disclosure of wire-tap materials is premature - before Defence files its Charter Application relating to the wire-tap processes.
In general, the Prosecution wishes to withhold materials sought.
For the Defence, Kevin McCullough made several points. Specifically, he argued that Defence is not on a fishing expedition but has said why the material sought is relevant - Defence seeks to know if material submitted from informers has been judged reliable, or if it is contradictory of valid evidence gathered elsewhere. Some materials that have been disclosed, he argued, have been presented by the Crown as believed to be reliable when it has not been. Information gathered from disclosure reached by impartial review would stand as a basis, where unreliable, for cross-examination in trial (quite apart form any Charter Application about the use of wire-tap).
He pointed, further, to the fact that almost all the reporting on Dave Basi was undertaken in relation to the Drug investigation (not the BC Rail Scandal), and - as Michael Bolton said in court and outside the courtroom - allegations in that matter were wholly false and all suspicions of Basi in the Drug investigation were erased.
Mr. McCullough argued, in addition, that materials gathered by informers need not be covered in a blanket way by informer privilege, because some of it may be released to Defence without any chance of identifying the informer.
The flow of argument is clear: Crown believes the materials sought need no further review as to the claims they make for it. The Defence is unsatisfied with the claims, sees a need to test impartially for relevance and accuracy, and believes that Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett rejected the Crown as decider of relevance and named herself, as judge, as final arbitrar of the use to be made of materials applied for by Defence - as to relevance and informer privilege.
Essentially, Defence is asking Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie to review the materials and to make findings as requested. The Crown holds review by her is unnecessary.
Her general demeanour, as I observed it yesterday, suggested she would give short shrift to the wishes of the Defence. Today she appeared to be a great deal more serious about the terms of the Defence application. At ten in the morning of December 18 we will learn her final position.
Vancouver — A secret informant told police in 2003 that Dave Basi – one of the central figures in a political corruption trial – was laundering drug money through the Liberal Party, the Supreme Court of British Columbia has heard.
The informant's allegation was raised and immediately rejected as "totally false" by Mr. Basi's lawyer, Michael Bolton, during a defence application seeking disclosure of more than 400 RCMP files.
Mr. Bolton, who represents Dave Basi, and Kevin McCullough, the lawyer for Mr. Virk, told court the debriefing notes will show police relied on false information when getting authorizations to wiretap their clients.
Mr. Bolton said the RCMP obtained four wiretap authorizations in Victoria in 2003 while conducting a drug investigation of Jasmohan Singh Bains, who in 2008 was sentenced to nine years for conspiracy to traffic cocaine.
"Mr. Basi was a target in two [of those four wiretaps] ... [but] none of the authorizations ever related to any part of the BC Rail investigation," Mr. Bolton said.
Mr. Bolton said the BC Rail investigation flowed from the drug case – but police made the connection based on falsehoods.
"[An informant] said that Mr. Basi was cleaning some of Mr. Bains' drug money. Informant A ... said Mr. Basi was cleaning some of that drug money through the Liberal party ... [and] we believe that is totally false," Mr. Bolton said.
Twice during the day, the public gallery was cleared so lawyers could discuss the issue in camera. During one of those closed sessions, defence lawyers were also asked to leave so the judge could hear details about a secret informant.
Judge MacKenzie said she would give a ruling Friday.
Click HERE for the unabridged column by Mark Hume.
B.C. Supreme Court Justice Anne MacKenzie has ruled the prosecution properly asserted legal privilege to protect the identity of a confidential informant in the B.C. Rail corruption trial.
The justice conducted an in-camera hearing yesterday, sanctioned by the Supreme Court of Canada, at which defence attorneys, the three accused and the public were banned.
After reviewing Crown concerns, MacKenzie said special prosecutor Bill Berardino had acted appropriately.
Read Ian Mulgrew's full column HERE.
Its settled then, at least that's the way it went today (Dec. 15th, 2009). Madame Justice MacKenzie agrees with Defense Consul that neither the Crown via the Special Prosecutor eg. Ms Andrea Mackay, nor the RCMP were in a position by which they could determine whether the information is relevant or not. And we are talking here about secret informants. That jurisdiction lies solely with the Justtice MacKenzie as stated by Justice Bennett two years ago.
I would like to throw in one other category that shouldn't have had the right to determining what's relevant as evidence .... Ken Dobell as Deputy Minister to the Premier and Cabinet Secretarty.
"Ken Dobell, the former deputy minister to Premier Gordon Campbell, has admitted he reviewed confidential government documents seized by police in the B.C. Legislature raid case without signing an undertaking as required by a protocol created by the Special Prosecutor."
"Dobell, speaking to the Globe and Mail's Mark Hume, claimed he was not part of the "political side" of Campbell's office and as cabinet secretary he was part of an "independent, bureaucratic office."
That, Dobell said, meant he had not contradicted Campbell's claim in the Legislature last year that the premier's office was not involved in disclosure of evidence issues.
"There is a special prosecutor involved in this. The Premier's Office does not have a direct input into that ... This Premier's Office is not involved directly with that," Campbell said in 2007.
Dobell now says that his role as cabinet secretary was different.
"The cabinet secretary ... is an independent, bureaucratic office, it's not a political office, and in that sense, nobody in the Premier's office, on the political side, was involved in the issue," Dobell told Hume.
And Dobell says he was never asked by government lawyer George Copley to sign an undertaking as required by the protocol."
The morning was taken up with the 'in camera' (private) and 'ex parte' (with all others than Crown and judge excluded) taking of testimony by the Special Crown Prosecutor and his team from the secret witness - the way having been cleared by the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in the matter. As the afternoon session began - all were still excluded from the courtroom. Then only the gallery visitors were excluded. Then all were permitted entry and, late, the afternoon session began and shaped a tense set of confrontations.
Testy exchanges erupted between Defence counsel, Kevin McCullough and Janet Winteringham of the Special Crown Prosecutorial team, between Defence counsel and Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie. They seemed to begin when Mr. McCullough argued that an attempt to delay discussion of documents before the court until the Charter challenge is unreasonable. The case for informer privilege may be made at the proper time. But the issue now, and first, is whether the documents are relevant to the defence of the accused.
The argument was simple - the documents (in question) held by the Special Crown Prosecutor must be assessed by the judge and declared relevant or not relevant. That is not a small matter, Mr. McCullough said because there are hundreds of documents involved. The argument about whether some or all are protected (to the Crown Prosecutor) by informer privilege comes after relevance has been determined, he argued.
Among them are - Ms. Winteringham said - search warrant applications, wire tap applications, RCMP officer affidavits, confidential informer materials, informer material with relation to Mr. (Dave) Basi, and ... more.
Not only did Ms. Winteringham (according to Defence Counsel McCullough) say, or suggest, there were not hundreds of documents, but she insisted upon going through the binders of materials with the comments that they were not relevant and/or protected by informer privilege - as if to be claiming relevance or irrelevance could be undertaken by the Crown. That was not at all clear, but if she were not making the claim, Defence (it seems) wondered why she insisted upon including reference to relevance, document by document.
Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie appeared to be riding at least two horses around the circus tent. On the one hand she argued that she would be the arbitrar of relevance, but she also argued on precedent that both privilege and relevance arguments could be made at once by the Crown. And she suggested relevance might be limited, though Defence argued that documents Ms. Winteringham called irrelevant all concerned people who are connected to the investigation.
Defence and judge disagreed about the process of producing or denying (disclosure) materials. Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie insisted she was using the standard precedent to decide. Mr. McCullough argued that she was bound by the decision made by her predecessor Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett (modifying the precedent) who, on June 4, 2007 declared that henceforth the Crown could not make the 'irrelevant' argument about disclosure materials. And so Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie was re-writing the rules, Mr. McCullough suggested.
For those in the gallery much seemed puzzling about the afternoon.
was palplable - and she does not show her impatience with either charm or grace.
All added up to the sad feeling, I refer to above, that the quality of administration of justice in this case is being forced into question.
Put very simply - the afternoon must stand as example or (as they say in the Court) Exhibit A in an argument that perhaps the administration of justice in this case is being twisted.
Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett who was seized with the Basi, Virk, and Basi matter should not - many insist - have been permitted to leave the case. Her leaving was strange. The way in which she left was more than strange.
Some argue that there were senior people in the Court (and, perhaps, elsewhere in power) who disapprove of the way in which Defence counsel chose to proceed with their role. And at this point, the speculations become very serious, for Defence counsel holds that (1) the interactions of the superiors of the accused in the transfer of BC Rail to CNR, (2) the policies involved in the BC Rail Scandal, and (3) the single-minded concentration of investigators only upon the presently accused bear so materially on the accusations that those interactions and policies and investigations MUST be part of the evidence and argument surrounding the accusations.
Those interactions and policies, we have come to see, may not only vitiate the power of the accusations against the accused but they (cannot, it seems, but) open the question whether the superiors of the accused may, themselves, have undertaken actions which have criminal implications.
Then the questions begin to flood in. Was Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett'removed' because (whatever she may have thought personally) she knew the Defence was pursuing a perfectly legitimate Defence strategy? Was she 'removed' because she would not force the Defence to treat the case as a simple matter of several people in a room offering and accepting a bribe? Where did Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie come from? What angel delivered her to the Basi, Virk, and Basi matter? Does she believe (with complete independence) that her role is to stop Defence from its demand for materials that drag into the light dubious RCMP actions, inconsistent Special Crown Prosecutorial decisions, cabinet and BC Rail management interactions and policies undertaken to create and execute a sham "sale" of BC Rail (that may contain within it evidence of criminal breach of trust)?
Because the questions are becoming so central, and because they have to concern themselves partly with the deeply disturbing question whether the administration of justice is being interfered with in the Basi, Virk, and Basi matter - more will have to be said here and in very different form elsewhere.
Robin Mathews did request a copy of Madam Justice MacKenzie's curriculum vitae (cv).
I have been asked to respond to your letter on behalf of Madam Justice Mackenzie and Associate Chief Justice Dohm.
The Supreme Court does not have a curriculum vitae for Madam Justice Mackenzie; therefore, I cannot provide one to you.
New Supreme Court Justice on Basi Virk Basi / BC Rail trial.
The most interesting info. came in the form of a book review. Canadian Criminal Jury Instructions (CRIMJI) 4th ed., ISBN 1-55258-456-9, published Sept. 1, 2008 @ $350. a copy with CD updates is "the source of jury instructions and law that the bench and bar have turned to." Where Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett was one of the 3 authors, Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie was one of the 8 members of the editorial board.
I'd welcome information (with sources, please) to fill in some of the large gaps in the biography of Anne MacKenzie, a person who occupies a very important place in B.C. history at this time. - BC Mary.
I checked on today's BC Supreme Court listings despite the fact that those who attended yesterday seemed convinced that the hearing would be continuing today, beginning at 10:00 a.m.
Well, there's no court listing for Basi, Virk or Basi today. That's not to say the hearing isn't happening, or that it won't show up later on the court listings (as has happened before). But ... I am beginning to wonder ... how many self-serving co-incidences does it take, before I'm entitled to think there's mischief afoot?
And I'm pretty darn sure that not everybody in that courtroom is pleased to have the public watching.
Warning: watch for the first yabo to start howling "Conspiracy theory!" - BC Mary.
VANCOUVER — B.C. Supreme Court Justice Anne MacKenzie has ruled the prosecution properly asserted legal privilege to protect the identity of a confidential informant in the BC Rail corruption trial.
Vancouver — The prosecutors in a political corruption trial are asking the court not to disclose a large volume of documents on the grounds that releasing the material to the defence could identify several secret informants.
Janet Winteringham, a member of the special prosecutor's team, asserted "informant privilege" numerous times yesterday as she went through a binder containing more than 30 documents.
Ms. Winteringham also said much of the material stemmed from drug investigations that are not relevant to the charges of fraud, breach of trust and accepting benefits against Dave Basi, Bob Virk and Aneal Basi.
The three former government employees are accused of allegedly trading in secret government information concerning the $1-billion sale of BC Rail to CN Rail in 2003.
British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Anne MacKenzie followed along with Ms. Winteringham, reading the material that identified the secret informants, but defence lawyers were left holding binders where any material the Crown felt was sensitive had been blacked out.
The procedure created an unusual atmosphere in the court – where only the judge and the prosecutors knew fully what was being discussed.
Here is today's Vancouver Sun report of the most important trial ever held in British Columbia ... one paragraph.
7 p.m.: The Los Angeles Kings are coming to town and they are leading the National Hockey League's Western Conference. Catch the game and The Vancouver Sun online chat.
The defence has applied to the judge to stay the charges against the government aides in the Basi-Virk case because of the long delay it took to get the matter to trial. David Basi and Bob Virk were charged after confidential information was leaked during the 2003 bidding process for BC Rail, which was privatized and sold to CN Rail for $1 billion.
Day 46 of The Olympic torch relay returns to Ottawa, heads east to Cornwall and Akwesasne Mohawk Territory before looping back to Kingston.
The coroner's inquest into the 2007 murder-suicide in a posh Victoria neighbourhood that left five family members dead has been scheduled to reconvene today.
Appalling ... especially when one of our reliable reporters couldn't attend today because of illness. Bill Tieleman hopes to provide an update tomorrow.
BC Supreme Court listings confirm that there will be a pre-trial hearing in Vancouver on Monday, Dec. 14, 2009 for Bobby Virk, Aneal Basi and "Limited Access" beginning at 10:00 AM.
Long-awaited testimony about why the identity of a police informer in the BC Rail corruption case must remain secret will happen on Monday December 14 in BC Supreme Court - but the public, media and even defence lawyers will be barred from the hearing.
Only Special Prosecutor Bill Berardino and his legal team and Justice Anne MacKenzie will be in the courtroom, thanks to a decision Berardino won in the Supreme Court of Canada last month that overturned two lower BC court decisions.
Basi Virk thinking of changing venue to Victoria?
The Victoria Courthouse is one of the few in the province that offer nearly every legal service under one roof. It's bursting at the seams.
Lawyers, clerks and other court personnel prepare for proceedings in remand court, where everyone makes a first appearance, at the Victoria Courthouse.
The Victoria Courthouse was too small, almost from the day it opened, and the stresses it faces every day continue to make it bulge and creak.
Every morning, people cram the corner hallway outside Courtroom 103, remand court, where everybody makes his or her first court appearance.
The courtroom space and seating outside barely accommodate the early morning press. Taking their turn to offer free legal advice, defence lawyers walk the hall asking in a loud voice if anyone needs to see duty counsel.
Outside each courtroom, the security guard posts daily lists, showing the names of people accused of a crime or having a case heard. And every day, people move about looking for their names.
Spanning the block from Burdett Avenue to Courtney Street and butting up to Blanshard Street, the Victoria Courthouse continues its work each day. It provides a crucial community forum where wrongs can be addressed, rights asserted and differences of opinion are given an impartial hearing.
It's hugely important work, with elements dating from the 13th century and the Magna Carta, in which were first written a person's habeas corpus rights (no imprisonment without a charge heard in court).
It's a building struggling to carry on in the face of tough community problems. How else can you explain a public building -- where narcotics offences are routinely prosecuted -- that provides in its public washrooms a disposal box for drug users to safely discard used syringes?
Those public washrooms serve a larger community than those involved in the legal system. Homeless people strip and have a body wash or empty out their backpacks to rinse out and do laundry.
But the Victoria Courthouse carries on, completing its work, in an environment most people never notice.
It opened in 1962, after years of delays, when W.A.C. Bennett was premier, taking over from the old courthouse in Bastion Square, a building that now houses the B.C. Maritime Museum.
Back then the new building had only four floors and only four courtrooms occupying the top two levels.
In 1975, at a cost of nearly $1.9 million, another two floors were added. Policy and administrative bureaucrats occupy the sixth floor.
A library occupies most of the fifth floor. It's operated by the B.C. Courthouse Library Society and contains about 20,000 volumes, many of which have yet to be digitized.
The stacks contain volumes dating back as far as 1859, when Vancouver Island was still a colony. The library also contains subscriptions to legal databases, with information on topics as far ranging as human rights and property law.
It is open to the public and assists people trying to draw up their own will, research custody law or look into condominium, or strata, property matters.
The seven courtrooms on the third and fourth floors are normally reserved for Supreme Court, with the judge's chambers tucked in behind unmarked, locked doors.
Provincial court operates out of the seven courtrooms on the first and second floors. And provincial court judges have their offices tucked out of sight on the second floor, again behind unmarked, locked doors.
On the first floor, opening onto Courtney Street, lies the criminal registry, storing files going back at least 10 years for each of the thousands of cases heard or underway.
Also on the first floor and tucked in behind entrances guarded by sheriff's deputies are 12 holding cells. These are for people already in custody or refused bail and are used only when court is in session. People in custody are transported to the Vancouver Island Regional Correctional Centre on Wilkinson Road.
All these services make the Victoria Courthouse what is now a provincial rarity. Of the 88 courthouses in B.C., only three others, Prince George, Kelowna and Kamloops, offer one-stop venues for the same range of legal practice and service.
So, inside the Victoria Courthouse sit the B.C. provincial court, the B.C. Supreme Court, youth court, family court, small-claims court and justices of the peace and, when it's convened, the B.C. Court of Appeal, the highest in the province.
All other courthouses in B.C. have either been split up due to workload, as in the Lower Mainland, or serve communities too small to justify the full range.
And on the back of the Victoria Courthouse building still sits the Victoria land titles office. It's where the titles and records of ownership of land and property are still held, despite an attempt by the province to shut it down a few years ago.
Accommodating all this service has meant renovations and adjustments that have left the building workable, but only just.
For example, two of the four courtrooms on the fourth floor are tiny rooms crammed off to the side. Originally, they were jury rooms, but they have been divided in half to provide extra court space.
On floors one and two, what were various other government offices have been taken over by provincial court, which gained a new prominence in 1990 when the province merged the old County Court with the Supreme Court. County Court was a holdover from the 19th century.
Hamar Foster, law professor at the University of Victoria, said from an administrative perspective having four levels of court -- provincial, county, supreme and appeals -- was just too cumbersome.
Now, six courtrooms regularly serve provincial court. And one remand court has been designated in recent months in which a justice of the peace presides.
All the renovations and additions are part of a process that former Supreme Court justice Bob Hutchison calls muddling through.
"It's grown like topsy," Hutchison said in an interview. "But they have muddled through just as everything gets done in this country."
The result is a building that functions only because the people who work in it make it function.
These days, he said, the courthouse "meets the needs of the community at the end of the day because we make it."
Most agree the building is not up to 21st century standards. Electronics, for example, are a constant problem. This, when virtually every major case has some electronic component, like wire-tap evidence or electronic communications.
Victoria's courtrooms are barely wired for the mid-20th century, let alone the 21st, lacking a speaker system to properly amplify the voice of a witness.
Nils Jensen, a prosecutor who regularly employs computer programs to present evidence in complex fraud trials, said the Victoria Courthouse has a way to go to reach modern standards.
Jensen said Courtroom 20 in the Vancouver Law Courts, where the marathon Air India trial was conducted, is considered B.C.'s gold standard courtroom.
It has computer plug-ins, wireless Internet, a large, flat video screen for the jury, separate screens for the judge, lawyers and accused, digital recording, real-time transcription service and computer screen illustration capacity.
But in Victoria, Jensen said, clerks and staff members do "a great job of cobbling together what little technology we have. It keeps us stumbling through."
Read the full article HERE. It's an unexpectedly charming introduction to the building where BC history will be made, if the Basi Virk - BC Rail Trial is transferred there. - BC Mary.
Paul Kennedy and Robert Dziekanski. The RCMP's William Elliott, its Gary Bass, and the BC Rail Scandal.
The Globe and Mail doesn't mention that top man at the RCMP, William Elliott, telephoned the men involved to express solidarity with them. They are men whose conduct Paul Kennedy (with comic understatement) says in his 208-page Report "fell short of that [conduct] expected of members of the RCMP".
Paul Kennedy always writes as if chewing a mouthful of cottonwool. His "scathing report" (the Vancouver Province) repeats what every decent observer has been saying for months – while adding a few busloads of padding.
Paul Kennedy has been a harboured bureaucrat for so long he couldn't write a scathing report if he was the first investigator of the Nazi Death Camps. I imagine him writing – in a brief 2000-page report – that Death Camp employees followed to the letter the procedures set, and should be commended for that. I imagine him going on to say that Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels, and Goring probably meant well, but somehow, the execution of their orders may not have been carried out in the best of public interest in the Death Camps.
The Globe and Mail doesn't tell its readers that BC's premier Gordon Campbell met top BC RCMP officer Gary Bass and expressed his personal feeling of sympathy for those guilty of serious impropriety (at least) in the Dziekanski fiasco.
The Globe and Mail doesn't connect the Dziekanski cover-up with repeated RCMP cover-up of RCMP officer wrongdoing: Ian Bush, Kevin St. Arnaud, Kelly Marie Richard, David Ambrose, and…and…and….
Nor does the Globe and Mail mention that Paul Kennedy's Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP frequently backed the RCMP's dangerous folly – and its almost certainly manipulated "investigations of itself".
Now being given the Heave-Ho by the Harperites (who I believe want a corrupt RCMP to match their own core values), Paul Kennedy unleashes his death-bed repentance. Too little. Too late.
Perhaps, at the other end of the scale, angry motorcyclists who rallied at Surrey provincial courthouse Tuesday carried too extreme a sign, saying "RCMP Canada's biggest criminal organization". Motorcyclists were there because Corporal Benjamin (Monty) Robinson seems to have been given special treatment by Crown prosecutors. Recommended for a charge of impaired driving by the Delta Police after he had hit and killed motorcyclist Orion Hutchinson on October 25, 2008, the charge was changed to the lighter "obstruction of justice". That kind of action by the Crown appears to happen all too often in cases involving the RCMP.
The same Robinson is singled out in Paul Kennedy's 208-page report – as senior officer in the Dziekanski disaster – for failing to take charge (implying, I suggest, a failure to regulate action to prevent death).
The population of B.C. (and of Canada and the world) is largely of the view that criminal charges should be laid in the Dziekanski affair.
But the B.C. Criminal Justice Branch, which decided not to lay charges earlier, is still holding to its decision – despite a growing flood of incriminating evidence in the matter.
And so Corporal Benjamin Robinson seems, now, to have been twice protected from facing criminal charges others believe his actions warrant. The actions in which Robinson has been involved are extreme – both involving the death of innocent people.
A reasonable Canadian must ask if we are facing a combination of RCMP cover-up and Crown prosecutorial discrimination that shields wrongdoing? If so, it appears to happen where RCMP investigates itself and finds no reason to censure apparent glaring improprieties committed by police officers. It appears, too, to happen when the Crown decides not to charge, or to mitigate charges, where allegations are brought against police officers.
Those recurring matters seem to happen, also, at much higher levels. Repeatedly, in pre-trial hearings of the Basi, Virk, and Basi charges in the BC Rail Scandal matter, Defence counsel has claimed delay and obstruction by the RCMP – and, as well, by the Special Crown Prosecutor.
Defence counsel – seeking disclosure materials relevant to the defence of their clients – have uncovered a large amount of material to support their position as Defence. They allege (as a part of Defence argument) that Gordon Campbell and senior others intended to transfer BC Rail to CNR long before announced, misrepresented the real and potential value of BC Rail, deliberately dismembered it, staged a phoney open, public auction of BC Rail, and did so with an expensive campaign using vast amounts of public money. Defence base their allegations on real, secured evidentiary material.
That material, I allege, points to criminal breach of trust and to violation of fiduciary duty on the part of Gordon Campbell and associates involved in the transfer of BC Rail to CNR.
I have written to Deputy Commissioner Gary Bass requesting full RCMP investigation to determine the facts of the matter. Bass has written me mostly empty rhetorical bombast. He has suggested others, too, are interested in the matter.
Then he asks me to give him evidence that he can act upon. That is THE GRAND POLICE COP-OUT. When someone like Bass wants to kill allegations and to do nothing, he says "YOU get the evidence and YOU bring it to me" – when that is one of the main tasks of the police (and he knows it).
Responsible officers of the court have based Defence strategy on the integrity of their allegations about the gigantic fraud and misrepresentation undertaken by Gordon Campbell and his associates that they attest are revealed by hundreds of documents in the possession of the court.
I have pointed Deputy Commissioner Bass to that material – which I am forbidden to possess but which I have heard extracts of and arguments from for more than two years in court.
I have done my duty as a responsible Canadian. I insist Deputy Commissioner Bass refuses to do his. And his refusal – I sincerely believe – is a part of the whole, present refusal of the RCMP in British Columbia to uphold the rule of law.
I may be correct in believing that the present behaviour of the RCMP not only points to laxity in relation to unchecked criminal action among Force members at lower levels, but also to RCMP support for and prevention of investigation of possible criminal wrongdoing at the highest levels of government.
The administration of justice in British Columbia seems to follow a pattern of abuse that is seamless. From the so-called "cop on the beat", through Crown prosecutorial agencies, up to (and including) the cabinet, the administration of justice seems deliberately faulty.
The role of the courts in what I believe is that seamless maladministration of justice casts huge shadows on the courts themselves. They cannot be untouched when general corruption is the milieu in which they work.


Reserve your spot with Ngozi L.
I'm a graduate of sociology and psychology from Delta State University. I hold a post graduate degree in Education and I am a trained Montessori Directress from the North American Montessori Centre, Canada .
I have 10 years teaching experience both in the primary and nursery session. I'm currently a nursery teacher in one of the benchmark schools in Nigeria .My strength lies in the ability to help struggling children learn to read.
My teaching technique has always been child centred, focusing on the weaknesses of the child and working hard to make those weaknesses become strengths. Every student has different ways of assimilating and I am flexible enough to fit every child's learning process to bring out the best in them.
Corona Schools Trust Council, Lagos Nigeria.
I currently hold the post of a class teacher to 3-5year olds. I am currently the technology integration specialist in my school because of my vast knowledge in IT. I always make sure the class learning environment is serene and calm even though we're having fun while learning. I prepare detailed interesting lessons and implement these lessons in a creative way that captivates the minds of my students.


If you're looking to put more power to the ground, look no further than this S550 Mustang Torsen differential! Torsen hardware is identical to 2015-2016 Mustang GT Performance Package cars. Torsen is known for producing heavy duty Mustang rear differentials. The Torsen T2R features full-time torque sensing and biasing that can handle the high demands of road racing. Torque sensing keeps engine power on the ground during changing traction conditions.
Ford Performance Torsen differentials use a worm gear friction system that will not wear out like conventional clutch-type positive traction differentials. The Torsen T2R differential is manufactured by Ford Performance (formerly Ford Racing) to fit a rear end that is 8.8" along with 3.31, 3.55 or 3.73 Super 8.8" Gear Sets. As a standard part of the 2015-2017 GT Performance Package, this differential will take your Pony to a whole new level regardless if you are using it on the road or pushing it on the track. Designed to fit 34-spline axles, this differential will support a solid rear-end or new Independent Rear Suspension (IRS) installation.


Home > Historical Resources > Learn about the Archives > Where do Collections Come from?
Records are essential to the proper interpretation of our state's history, and the State Archives is mandated to collect and to maintain this documentary evidence. The State Archives is the official repository for more than thirty thousand cubic feet of archival records. These records are stored in secured stacks on the building's second and third floors. Both stack areas feature climatic and environmental controls to protect the historical integrity of these records.
A broad spectrum of public and non-public records are maintained by the Acquisitions Department. These range from recently enacted legislative bills to documents dating back to Louisiana's colonial period. The most important of these records are secured in two fire proof vaults on the building's second floor. Within this steel and concrete structure are housed such historical treasures as the Treaty of New York, the Constitution of the West Florida Republic, the Ordinance of Secession, the original acts of the State Legislature, the Huey Long assassination inquiry, colonial documents from the Opelousas Post, the official records of Louisiana's Confederate government, original constitutions, and various historical artifacts. Access to these vaults as well as to the general stack area is limited.
Documents received by the acquisitions staff are evaluated, inventoried, catalogued, and added to the State Archives archival database prior to their being stored in acid free boxes.
If you have something you would like to donate, please call the Acquisitions Department for the criteria at 225.922.1218 or send us a message.


Benjamin R. Mandel, executive director, is a global strategist in the Multi-Asset Solutions group at J.P. Morgan Asset Management in New York. He is also an adjunct professor at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs. Ben began his career as an economist in the International Finance division at the Federal Reserve Board and in the International Research group at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Prior to joining J.P. Morgan, he was a member of the Global Economics team at Citi Research. Ben's academic research has been published in leading scholarly journals, including: American Economic Review, American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Quantitative Finance and the Journal of Economic Perspectives. He has a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of California, Davis and a B.Sc. from Cornell University.
After a year of growth scares and choppy markets, we see a modestly better outlook in 2016, with the U.S. economy in mid-cycle, the recovery broadening out in Europe and some early signs of stabilization in emerging economies.
Benjamin Mandel, Global Strategist within the Multi-Asset Group, recaps the impact of global markets on multi-asset portfolios over the past week.


INLET 1.5" 1.5" 1.5" 1.5"
DISCHARGE 1.5" 1.5" 1.5" 1.5"
The ValuFlo 1000 series has set the standard by which all others are measured. Perfect blend of medium pressure and ample flow for the majority of ponds. Motor is totally-enclosed, fan-cooled for durability. 115V or 230V. 18 month limited warranty. Supplied with an 8-foot, 115V cordset. Made in USA.


text:
/* common.h -- extern declarations for functions defined in common.c. */

/* Copyright (C) 1993 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

   This file is part of GNU Bash, the Bourne Again SHell.

   Bash is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under
   the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free
   Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option) any later
   version.

   Bash is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY
   WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
   FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License
   for more details.

   You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
   with Bash; see the file COPYING.  If not, write to the Free Software
   Foundation, 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111 USA. */

#if  !defined (__COMMON_H)
#  define __COMMON_H

#include "stdc.h"

#define ISOPTION(s, c)	(s[0] == '-' && !s[2] && s[1] == c)

/* Flag values for parse_and_execute () */
#define SEVAL_NONINT	0x01
#define SEVAL_INTERACT	0x02
#define SEVAL_NOHIST	0x04

/* Functions from common.c */
extern void builtin_error __P((const char *, ...));
extern void builtin_usage __P((void));
extern void no_args __P((WORD_LIST *));
extern void bad_option __P((char *));
extern int no_options __P((WORD_LIST *));

extern char **make_builtin_argv __P((WORD_LIST *, int *));
extern void remember_args __P((WORD_LIST *, int));

extern void push_context __P((void));
extern void pop_context __P((void));
extern void push_dollar_vars __P((void));
extern void pop_dollar_vars __P((void));
extern void dispose_saved_dollar_vars __P((void));
extern int dollar_vars_changed __P((void));
extern void set_dollar_vars_unchanged __P((void));
extern void set_dollar_vars_changed __P((void));

extern int get_numeric_arg __P((WORD_LIST *, int));
extern int read_octal __P((char *));

/* Keeps track of the current working directory. */
extern char *the_current_working_directory;
extern char *get_working_directory __P((char *));
extern void set_working_directory __P((char *));

#if defined (JOB_CONTROL)
extern int get_job_spec __P((WORD_LIST *));
#endif
extern int display_signal_list __P((WORD_LIST *, int));

/* It's OK to declare a function as returning a Function * without
   providing a definition of what a `Function' is. */
extern struct builtin *builtin_address_internal __P((char *, int));
extern Function *find_shell_builtin __P((char *));
extern Function *builtin_address __P((char *));
extern Function *find_special_builtin __P((char *));
extern void initialize_shell_builtins __P((void));

/* Functions from set.def */
extern void initialize_shell_options __P((int));
extern void list_minus_o_opts __P((int, int));
extern int set_minus_o_option __P((int, char *));
extern int minus_o_option_value __P((char *));
extern void reset_shell_options __P((void));
extern char **get_minus_o_opts __P((void));

/* Functions from shopt.def */
extern void reset_shopt_options __P((void));
extern char **get_shopt_options __P((void));

/* Functions from type.def */
extern int describe_command __P((char *, int, int));

/* Functions from setattr.def */
extern int set_or_show_attributes __P((WORD_LIST *, int, int));
extern int show_var_attributes __P((SHELL_VAR *, int, int));
extern int show_name_attributes __P((char *, int));
extern void set_var_attribute __P((char *, int, int));

/* Functions from pushd.def */
extern char *get_dirstack_from_string __P((char *));
extern char *get_dirstack_element __P((int, int));
extern void set_dirstack_element __P((int, int, char *));
extern WORD_LIST *get_directory_stack __P((void));

/* Functions from evalstring.c */
extern int parse_and_execute __P((char *, char *, int));
extern void parse_and_execute_cleanup __P((void));

/* Functions from evalfile.c */
extern int maybe_execute_file __P((char *, int));
extern int source_file __P((char *));
extern int fc_execute_file __P((char *));

#endif /* !__COMMON_H */

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
This Expedition (Not Race) Is Impossible (Not Amazing)
A few days ago I wrote a post about the new ABC series Expedition Impossible: Kingdom of Morocco. The network had released a "sneak peak" video which was supposed to be embeddable. I had watched that sneak peak and to be very honest was very enthusiastic about what I was seeing. My one big concern was whether the rest of the show would live up to that first fifteen minutes. If the commenter at the Television Without Pity forums are to be believed, it was a boring Amazing Race rip-off, lightened only by a couple of comments by local Berber tribesmen.
Me? I liked it. So I guess that puts me in a minority position.
Expedition Impossible features thirteen teams of three individuals with a pre-existing relationship, and a first prize of $150,000 and three Ford Explorers. Series Producer Mark Burnett has stated that the prize was set so low to encourage teams who were in it for the adventure rather than for the money. The race will consist of ten stages with one team being eliminated at the end of each stage. So in that way at least it does sound like The Amazing Race. On the other hand Expedition Impossible doesn't go around the world; it doesn't even go outside of one country. In a way it is a lot more like Burnett's original reality series, Eco-Challenge. In Eco-Challenge teams of four raced over a 300 mile course, but without set rest stops. Teams weren't eliminated they either completed the course or dropped out.
Expedition Impossible takes elements from both shows but does it in some interesting ways. There are stages in Expedition Impossible, and at the end of each stage a team is eliminated. There are checkpoints and challenges, but for the most part the challenges follow fairly well out of what the teams are doing in the stage. The biggest thing of all of course is that the challenges are not the dominant aspect of the stages. In a lot of stages of The Amazing Race – a show which I love with a hot burning passion as just about everyone who knows me understands – the challenges dominate while the travel may have an impact but it isn't expressly designed to. Position may depend on whether or not you can drive a stick shift or whether your cab driver knows where you want him to go (some of the best/worst incidents on The Amazing Race have been Racers dealing with cab drivers, including one incident where a contestant was nearly arrested in Kenya) but accomplishing challenges is the bigger deal. In Expedition Impossible getting there isn't half the "fun," it's all the "fun."
The first episode begins with thirteen white Ford Explorers driving across the Sahara desert while Berber horsemen ride along with them. The thirteen teams are:
- The California Girls: three women who met while attending UC Davis
- The Cops: three male police officers from suburban Boston
- The Country Boys: three boyhood friends from Mississippi
- The Fab 3: a brother and sister and the brother's ex-boyfriend who all live together
- The Fishermen: two brothers and a cousin from Gloucester Massachusetts
- The Football Players: the former pro football players who first met while playing at San Diego State
- Grandpa's Warriors: three generations of a family from central Illinois,father son and granddaughter
- The Gypsies: three self-described free spirited nomadic adventurers
- Latin Persuasion: three Latina women who are friends and co-wrokers
- Mom's Army: a mother and her two daughters, both of whom have served in the US Army
- New York Firemen: three New York firefighters who all grew up in the same neighbourhood
- No Limits: three friends from Colorado, one of whom (Erik) is blind
- Team Kansas: Three sisters who were born in Kansas though one now lives in Houston Texas
The racers leave their cars and line up before show host Dave Salmoni who is a Canadian born wildlife expert who has hosted TV series for Discovery Channel and Animal Planet. He tells them that they are running the race in this area with the blessing of the local Berber Tribesmen and give a basic introduction to the contest. He also tells them a traditional Berber saying: "Choose your companions before you choose the road." Good advice, because the contestants on this show are going to have to depend on their teammates, and possibly on other teams in order to complete every stage. Moreover, if one team member quits that team is automatically eliminated. With that he gives them their first task – to pass through a pair of flags and then find a camel camp where they'll pick up their next instructions. The flags are on the top of a sand dune, Akbar, one of the football players, estimates that the sand dune is about four or five football fields high, so between 400 and 500 feet. Then at Dave's signal the tribemen fire their rifles and the race has started.
The trip up the sand dune appears to be a trying one, although most teams follow the same route along the ridge of the dune to the flags. The lead alternates between the Fab 3, No Limits and the Gypsies. Trailing behind are the Country Boys and Latin Persuasion.part way up the dune one member of the Country Boys seems physically beaten and stops climbing. This is enough for the women of Latin Persuasion to pull past them. The Country Boys, who had been very disparaging towards the women from New York (CB1: "They look like a dance group." CB2: "A damned ugly dance group.") use this to try to motivate their colleague, and after the commercial it seems to have worked.
When the teams reach the Camel camp they receive their instructions. They have to select three camels from the handlers at the camp, load them with baskets to carry some firewood and other equipment, and take them to their next checkpoint, Lone Palm. The instructions say nothing about riding the camels although most of the teams try to do so. They soon discover something: camels are very ornery animals. In fact one of contestants say that instead of saying "stubborn as a mule," people should say "stubborn as a camel." For their part the camels aren't exactly happy about being loaded or ridden by people whose main experience with the animals is seeing them in the zoo. A couple of people were kicked and several were thrown, with the local Berber tribesmen hired to control the camels until the teams arrived looking on knowingly and occasionally shaking their heads in disbelief. Some teams had better experiences than others, and some teams opted to lead their camels rather than have one or more members of their team riding them. The focus at the Camel Camp is on the leading teams – The Gypsies, the Football Players Fab 3, and No Limits – and on the final three teams Country Boys, Grandpa's Warriors and especially on Latin Persuasion, There is a lot of focus on the disputes between the three women of Latin Persuasion who seem to be fighting practically from the beginning. Their lack of teamwork is definitely having an impact on them.
The walk to Lone Palm Camp – about a mile and a half from the starting line but probably longer because there is a specific route laid out in the instructions which is not stated in Dave Salmoni's narration – apparently takes a considerable time. When they get there they have an assigned task. They have to "find water the local way," but there is no indication of what that way is, or apparently a local "Berber dude" to suggest how they should do it. They have to fill a glass jug with water which they will then use to water the camels. The first three teams to arrive are Fab 3, No Limits and the Football Players, and none of them has any ideas of where the water might be. One of the Football players thinks they can cut open the hump of a camel because of course that's where they store their water. And this is from a guy with a college education! (Okay, admittedly there are different standards for football players, but still…) The players look around at the various things scattered around the area, including some buckets and the glass jugs they're supposed to fill, and there's no watter. Eventually one of the people of Fab 3 decides that the water must be under the sand, and starts digging. This is an idea which the Football Players ridicule: "there is no way you are going to find water under the sand in the Middle of the Sahara Desert." However Fab 3 persevere and are joined by the Gypsies and No Limits who help to dig. Meanwhile the newly arrived Fisherman start digging their own hole. When the three teams stop digging to see where they are, they're astonished to see their hole filling with water. They're almost as astonished to find the Football Player helping themselves to the water they dug for. As a result the Football Players leave in second place behind Fab 3, with the Gypsies close behind. As other teams arrive they are able to use the holes that the other teams had dug which allowed them to reduce the gap between them.
Meanwhile the three members of Latin Persuasion continue to argue with the greatest antagonism being directed at Mai, who seems totally disinterested in doing anything except sitting on the camel and looking prissy. When they reach Lone Palm Camp her two teammates do all of the work while she just stands around watching. Their constant yelling leads to a captioned statement from one of the Berber tribesmen at the location: "I would never have these women for my wife." Smart fellow. Eventually, when her two teammates stop yelling at her and work at persuading her to contribute more because they need her and if they all work together they can kick some ass in this, Mai comes around and tries to contribute.
Before leaving Lone Palm on foot the teams have to give the water in their jugs to the camels. Then they head of to Todra Mountain on foot. They have o climb the mountain, which in truth sounds harder than it actually is; there seems to be a recognizable path at least at the start. The teams have broken into three groups. The lead pack are Gypsies, Fab 3, Football Players and No limits, followed by Fishermen, Cops, New York Firemen, Team Kansas and California Girls in the middle, with Mom's Army, Country Boys, Grandpa's Warrior and Latin Persuasion in the final group about an hour behind. Interestingly the youngest participant in Grandpa's Warriors considers herself to be the weakest member of her team, becoming increasingly exhausted as they go along. And the terrain worsens as they go along, as evidenced by the addition of safety ropes on the steeper portions of the route. Reaching the end of their climb they find that they now have to rappel down the equivalent of 30 stories to the bottom of the Todra Gorge. It is one of the highest rappels in northern Africa. Once all of the team members are at the bottom of the gorge they must follow the dry river bed to the center of Snake Valley and their next checkpoint. Most of the teams have never rappelled before. Several team members worried about this, particularly the female member of Fab 3, but most took it ins stride. One person who had a lot of difficulty was Akbar from the Football Players, who explained that he didn't have a fear of heights, but rather a fear of going backwards down something that high. According to him, even Superman wouldn't have done that rappel. It must have shocked him when Erik, the blind competitor on No Limits zipped past him. Of course Erik has had significant experience in mountain climbing, including climbing to the summit of Mount Everest. The person who has the biggest problem with the rappel is the mother from Mom's Army. She's never done anything like this before and she's clearly outside of her comfort zone. She's tentative and nervous and worried abut her arm strength. Still one of the members of Latin Persuasion thinks that she's amazing for even trying this: "My mother would tell me to go to hell if I told her to do something like this." By the time they finish the rappel Latin Persuasion are ahead of Grandpa's Army by a few minutes.
When the teams had reached the check point at the center of Snake Valley they found the final task that would lead them to the end of the stage. They had to watch a Moroccan snake charming performance, and pay particular attention to the number of snakes that were used. Once they had what they believed to be the correct number of snakes they had to find a box with the corresponding number written on it. Inside that box would be a set of instructions. If they picked the right box they'd find the finish line for the stage about five miles away. If they picked a box that was wrong, they'd be directed on a half hour trek that would lead to a sign telling them that they'd gone the wrong way, and that they'd have to go back to the original checkpoint and recount the snakes. There are eleven snakes in the act. Of the first four teams, Gysies, Fab 3, and Football Players all say eleven, but No Limits see only ten (and as Erik says he sees no snakes – and as a result he has to trust his teammates because he can't contradict them). As a result Gypsies finish the stage in first place, with Fab 3 in second and the Football players in third. Meanwhile No Limits find themselves mired in the middle group, As for the back of the pack it is coming down to a race between Latin Persuasion, who left the checkpoint in twelfth place and Grandpa's Army who are in thirteenth. Night had fallen by the time that the fourth place team, Team Kansas reached the finish line. The next seven teams come in in what appears to be short order. All that are left are Latin Persuasion and Grandpa's Army, and in typical reality show fashion no indication is given as to their relative position to each other. We see two sets of headlamps moving down the mountain towards the finish line, and shots of the two teams trying to move down the path, but there is no indication of who is in the lead. In one of these shots it appears as though one of the women from Latin Persuasion is throwing up. Certainly they feel as if they are shutting down. Finally a team emerges from the darkness at the finish line. It's Grandpa's Warriors. Somewhere on the mountain they passed Latin Persuasion who come in in thirteenth place and are eliminated. It's late when they arrive, too late for them to be taken out so they stay in the camp with the rest of the teams. Then, as the rest of the teams watch them go, they are flown out the next morning.
As I've said, I Iike this show. I don't like it more than I like The Amazing Race but I do like it differently, because quite honestly they are different shows. I find it difficult to react to the claims that this is just an Amazing Race knock-off. Yes, there are elements that are taken from The Amazing Race – the various checkpoints and the tasks that the teams have to perform at each stage of the respective events. But those are hardly original aspects of either show. They operate much the same as a road rally in which there are stages to compete and in some rallies assigned tasks to complete during a stage. And I think that Expedition Impossible addresses some of the problems that some people have complained about during most seasons of The Amazing Race. At least so far there have been no "bottleneck" points where all teams are suddenly placed on an equal footing because something hasn't opened when they get there and I don't think there will be. Admittedly allowing teams to use the work of others at the water hole challenge had a similar effect since the leading teams had to spend much more time figuring out how to get the water and actually digging the holes than the trailing teams who found the holes dug and full of water. Another aspect of the Amazing Race that people have traditionally complained about is the influence of third parties in the race, whether it is getting assistance from locals to accomplish tasks or to serve as guides, or it's cab drivers who have no idea where they're going.
A huge difference between The Amazing Race and Expedition Impossible is the amount of endurance that a given stage requires. One of the football players stated that this race is harder than playing football because football players don't train for endurance. This was jumped on by a number of commenters in the various TV related blogs who claim that football coaches do train for endurance, but I think that there's a difference between the sort of endurance that a football coach requires of his players and what is required in this sort of event. It's not absolutely clear how many hours this first day of Expedition Impossible lasted for the leading teams, but the final teams to arrive came in well after dark, so it is fair to say that they were out there for a significant period of time. And for all of that time they are doing hard physical tasks, most of the time in temperatures of 100 degrees F or higher with little protection from the heat. During the climb of the sand dune they showed the temperature on at least three occasions; it went up from 95 to 110 during the time it took for the final team to reach the top. I don't think there are too many football teams that train that sort of endurance. In all honesty these are not the sort of tasks or conditions that you regularly see on The Amazing Race.
The fact that I basically like the show should not be taken to mean that I find it without flaws. There are plenty of those, starting with Dave Salmoni. The camels in the first episode had more personality than he exhibited here, and while I understand that he works with wild animals on his Animal Planet show I never get the feeling from him that he could do what is being asked of the teams on the show. You see Phil Keoghan doing these things all the time on The Amazing Race. There's no real indication of the passage of time during the episode. We really don't know how long it took them to run that stage of the event. Was it four hours? Six hours? Twelve hours? If they spent the entire day running that course it is a far more significant endurance contest than if they took four or five. Another issue is the position of teams relative to each other. Mostly what we had was Salmoni telling us that this group of teams was out if front, this group was in the middle and then there was the back group. And of course, inevitably, there was a significant difference in the amount of coverage that teams received. We spent a lot of time with the Gypsies, Fab 3, No Limits and Football Player teams and with Latin Expression (and to a lesser extent with Grandpa's Warrior) and virtually no time with teams like The Cops, or the California Girls. I suspect that this is a problem that inevitably shows up in this sort of programming – there isn't time to focus on all of the teams so you focus on the leaders, the last place teams and the ones with the most interesting stories. Still I think that this show has done a worse job of this than other shows of this type have done in the past, including Burnett's shows Survivor and Eco-Challenge.
Although there are weaknesses to Expedition Impossible, I generally like the show. It looks spectacular in High Def of course but I think we've reached a point where that isn't a consideration. I'm impressed by the endurance aspects of the competition and that Burnett has deliberately sought out people who are in this for the adventure rather than to get a lot of money or use the show as some career boost. I think that a lot of the complaints that others have voiced will be addressed in later episodes if the first episode was a relatively easy stage and subsequent stages involve more difficult challenges.
I think that the show has tremendous potential if renewed; the next season could be set in a different country with different terrain. There's room for improvement but people who don't remember the first season or two of The Amazing Race don't realize how much that show has evolved since it debuted. Given time I think that Expedition Impossible could evolve, learning the lessons of the first season. I don't anticipate this series becoming a mainstay of the regular season the way that The Amazing Race has (and was planned to be) but I think that it has some potential as a regular summer series. I liked it and recommend it, if not whole-heartedly then at least with fewer reservations than other people have expressed.Or maybe I'm just glad to have something to watch that's not another dating show or talent competition.
Labels: ABC, Reality Shows
Hye said...
This Expedition (Not Race) Is Impossible (Not Amaz...
Studio 60 Remembered – The Pilot
My Summer Project – Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip
James Arness - 1923-2011

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Loving your new Apollo X Audio Interface? Then why not "double-down" to create a multi-unit Apollo system with expanded I/O and DSP power and get a Custom Bundle of FREE UAD plug-ins?
Now through April 30th, purchase a second qualifying Apollo Interface and you'll receive a UAD Custom Plug-In Bundle — letting you pick up to 10 UAD plug-ins of your choice* (up to a $3,290 USD value) — absolutely free!
For full details, click this link.