Monday, August 31, 2009
Basi Virk: Kinsella won't be cross-examined. And "I call Bull Sh!T" says G.A.B.
Kinsella won't be cross examined
I call Bull Sh!T
From a comment today by Great Aunty Bertha. I have to agree with this statement. My concern is that Madam Justice Bennett may be stepping down from the most important trial ever held in British Columbia ... because ... because it already appears to be hopelessly tainted and corrupted. I think she doesn't want her name to be associated with what's coming. God help us, I don't want this to be true. - BC Mary.
__________________________________________________________________
Judge decides Kinsella should not be cross-examined by defence lawyers
VANCOUVER - The judge hearing pre-trial motions in the Basi-Virk political corruption case ruled Monday that Liberal insider Patrick Kinsella should not be cross-examined by defence lawyers at this point.
Justice Elizabeth Bennett dismissed the defence application to subpoena Kinsella to testify at a pre-trial hearing about what records he held that might be relevant to the defence.
The judge said she would try to provide written reasons for her ruling by Wednesday, when the case resumes with more legal argument about why Kinsella should provide any e-mails or other records to the defence.
Defence lawyer Michael Bolton called the judge's ruling "disappointing" but added the defence application may be renewed at a later date.
Earlier in the day, Kinsella's lawyer argued that there was no evidence that Kinsella played a major role in the controversial sale of BC Rail in 2003, Kinsella's lawyer argued Monday in court.
Jim Sullivan told the judge the defence failed to establish evidence to prove Kinsella played a major role in the sale of BC Rail, so he could be called to be cross-examined at a pre-trial hearing.
The lawyer said the defence was simply on a "fishing expedition using the long rod of cross-examination."
The defence can call Kinsella as a trial witness and question him then, the lawyer said.
To cross-examine Kinsella now would be an "unwarranted and unreasonable invasion of privacy," Sullivan said.
The Crown also urged the judge to dismiss the defence application.
The defence contends Kinsella played a key role in the $1-billion privatization sale of BC Rail to CN Rail in 2004.
Seeking e-mails and other records held by Kinsella, the defence cited two already disclosed e-mails that suggest Kinsella played a key role in the sale of BC Rail:
- May 19, 2004. E-mail sent by Kevin Mahoney, then vice-president of BC Rail, to Chris Trumpy, the "government's point man" on BC Rail, saying Kinsella got a call from David McLean, chairman of CN, who said the BC Rail deal was "at risk and anything they could do would be appreciated."
- Nov. 9, 2004. E-mail sent from Cheryl Yaremko, BC Rail's chief financial officer, to Mahoney, asking: "Do you know who Progressive Holdings is?" She had been reviewing payments before an audit. Mahoney sent a reply e-mail: "Progressive Holdings is Patrick Kinsella ... a lobbyist and Liberal backroom guy. He provided a great deal of backroom support."
Kinsella is a political advisor to the premier and a Vancouver consultant who received almost $300,000 from BC Rail between 2002 and 2005.
{Snip} ...
Earlier this morning, the judge received an update on the disclosure of e-mails related to a number of members of the legislature.
Read more HERE.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Basi-Virk defence 'fishing' by calling Kinsella as witness: lawyer
Keith Fraser
The Province - August 31, 2009
Click HERE for the column.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Judge in Basi Virk Case denies application to cross-examine Patrick Kinsella
Keith Fraser
The Province - August 31, 2009
Click HERE for the full column.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Ian Mulgrew said, a week ago:
... If Kinsella is shown to have been working for both railways at the same time, the landscape of this politically charged trial will change completely.
That accusation is the lynchpin of the defence ...
If Kinsella did play a dual role in the deal, it would buttress the claim that Basi and Virk were only following the orders of their political masters, that the railway auction was rigged in CN's favour and that everyone knew it.
The defence argument holds that the Liberals wanted to sell the provincial freight operation to CN Rail and the troubled bidding process was designed only to legitimize the privatization; Basi and Virk were told to keep OmniTrax publicly in the running so it would appear the process was competitive ...
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Defence in corruption trial loses bid to grill Kinsella
Mark Hume
The Globe and Mail - August 31, 2009
Click HERE for the full column.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Don't let yourself be knocked over so easily ...
worse is coming, I think,
and we gotta be strong.
.
Robin Mathews needs company in the gallery - lots of it! And BC'ers need to get MAD!! Not classily miffed...GET MAD!! And let both forms of government (the judiciary and the executive) see it and hear it. OOPS! I know the judiciary and executive are separate, or they're supposed to be...lol...but I know for certain now that they're not. Campbell is one powerful dude in the province - he owns the SC too.
I am not impressed.
: August 31, 2009 at 7:59 p.m. : August 31, 2009 at 8:58 p.m. This sounds lovely when I read it over and over ... but the actual meaning of it relevant to ... Bennett? ... or Kinsella? is not clear to me.
Would you say it again, please, plus lentment?
Many thanks.
For those who are unaware, there are only a couple of SCBC trials going on during the typical Summer day. Motions lists are reduced to half the levels of other times of the year. Court masters work half day per week, at best, and at full pay ($170,000 per year). Folks: you are accomodating your paid fiduciaries, who are supposed to work for your benefit alone. When the retired chief justice, Donald Brenner, was given that task of co-authoring the lawyer friendly, Rules of Court, with Alan Seckel (then Oppal' Deputy), he should have been subject to intense scrutiny.
See below an example of the kind of work we can expect from our courts, and this is from a connected Registrar under judicial direction. Estate Beneficiaries had to sue an Executor who tried to bribe one, in exchange for a lesser distribution. And the victims had to pay their court costs out of Estate residue, to end the delayed windup of the Estate. This indulgence of trust bending should be front page news:
http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2009/2009bcsc292/2009bcsc292.html
: August 31, 2009 at 9:16 p.m. It is depressing, it started being depressing the day they raided the Victoria "clubhouse". It hasn't let up since then, LOL!
On another note here is what Ontario says about sub judice:
http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/legis/subjudicerule.asp
: August 31, 2009 at 10:09 p.m. : August 31, 2009 at 10:20 p.m. no, that's only in the US....
<< Home
