Monday, June 07, 2010
Robin Mathews and the BC Rail Political Corruption Trial, June 7, 2010
.
The Day in Courtroom 54. Basi, Virk, and Basi June 7, 2010
A long and torturous day of wrangling inside and outside the court proper ended with what may be reported to the public of the days proceedings: Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie first called in the jury to report to them that the trial would NOT take six to eight weeks as she instructed them at the outset - but now might well go into March of next year - that is nine months from today! A break would be taken at mid-July until the end of August. And a two weeks break would be taken from December 17. The jury retired to discuss if they could continue to be a jury.
The jury reported after deliberation that ten of them could surely continue, and that two needed hours to work out if they can. Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie (who is always sugar-pop sweet to the jury) told them that it would be natural to have reason (doctor's appointments, etc.) to call for short breaks in the trial over the new extended time.
Tomorrow morning the court sits at ten a.m, to continue the wrangling - in another form - with public present. In the afternoon, the jury will be called at two. And the fate of the trial as proceeding will be determined. The two jury members who must work out if they can undertake the newly announced long-term trial will report back to the sheriff as early as possible. (Probably tomorrow morning.)
If a working jury cannot be available, mistrial will be called, a new jury impanelled, and a new trial date set out.
The day seemed long. Again I am of the opinion the public has a right to know the business being transacted in its name. I believe that the jury, too, could have heard the whole day - and been the better a jury for having done so. Signs have been up that the BC higher court system is too clubby, too elitist, even arrogant. If that is true, the officers of the higher court system will believe no one of the public is really fit to understand the arcane deliberations it undertakes.
I believe Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie should rethink her publication ban - but I don't think she will. Will her refusal to do so describe deep wisdom and experience ... or elitism and arrogance?
It is important to ask that question here, for it will not be asked in any of the publications describing themselves as "mainstream".
The Day in Courtroom 54. Basi, Virk, and Basi June 7, 2010
A long and torturous day of wrangling inside and outside the court proper ended with what may be reported to the public of the days proceedings: Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie first called in the jury to report to them that the trial would NOT take six to eight weeks as she instructed them at the outset - but now might well go into March of next year - that is nine months from today! A break would be taken at mid-July until the end of August. And a two weeks break would be taken from December 17. The jury retired to discuss if they could continue to be a jury.
The jury reported after deliberation that ten of them could surely continue, and that two needed hours to work out if they can. Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie (who is always sugar-pop sweet to the jury) told them that it would be natural to have reason (doctor's appointments, etc.) to call for short breaks in the trial over the new extended time.
Tomorrow morning the court sits at ten a.m, to continue the wrangling - in another form - with public present. In the afternoon, the jury will be called at two. And the fate of the trial as proceeding will be determined. The two jury members who must work out if they can undertake the newly announced long-term trial will report back to the sheriff as early as possible. (Probably tomorrow morning.)
If a working jury cannot be available, mistrial will be called, a new jury impanelled, and a new trial date set out.
The day seemed long. Again I am of the opinion the public has a right to know the business being transacted in its name. I believe that the jury, too, could have heard the whole day - and been the better a jury for having done so. Signs have been up that the BC higher court system is too clubby, too elitist, even arrogant. If that is true, the officers of the higher court system will believe no one of the public is really fit to understand the arcane deliberations it undertakes.
I believe Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie should rethink her publication ban - but I don't think she will. Will her refusal to do so describe deep wisdom and experience ... or elitism and arrogance?
It is important to ask that question here, for it will not be asked in any of the publications describing themselves as "mainstream".
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Comments:
<< Home
Thought this tip from a comment on Bill T's site was noteworthy:
Premier Gordon Campbell spent his weekend rubbing shoulders with some of the world's leading political and business figures at the 58th annual Bilderberg Meeting in Sitges, Spain.
The secretive invite-only meeting — dubbed by London's The Independent as an "annual cabal of the world's elite" — pulls together top international names to discuss issues such as foreign affairs and the economy.
[...]
The meetings took place June 3-6 and Campbell's trip was paid for by the provincial government.
Jonathan Fowlie, Vancouver Sun
CC
Premier Gordon Campbell spent his weekend rubbing shoulders with some of the world's leading political and business figures at the 58th annual Bilderberg Meeting in Sitges, Spain.
The secretive invite-only meeting — dubbed by London's The Independent as an "annual cabal of the world's elite" — pulls together top international names to discuss issues such as foreign affairs and the economy.
[...]
The meetings took place June 3-6 and Campbell's trip was paid for by the provincial government.
Jonathan Fowlie, Vancouver Sun
CC
# posted by 
: June 7, 2010 at 9:03 p.m.
: June 7, 2010 at 9:03 p.m.
Well, I went and slaughtered a sheep tonight so I could read its liver, baked its bones to make charcoal dice and cast them and otherwise did what I could to impore the ancient gods to reveal the secret ways of the heremetic mindset of the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Here's what some funny bulges in the sheep's liver told me (it was an alcoholic sheep so the lumps might just have been cirrhosis though....):
Any sane person familiar with te amount of evidence and the number of listed witnesses, and likely witness, would never have set this trial for six weeks in the first place. I daresay Justice Bennett would never have presumed to set such a short trial term or engage jury members for such a preposterously short trial.
But also maybe it was a setup; so the "Special" Prosecutor and his cronies could find out the Defence strategy, and upon doing so force a mistrial so they could regroup and also coach all their witnesses. Hell, maybe they should all be called to Savary Island just to get their stories straight (="matching" and appropriately evasive).
What I mean is that this could not have been Defence's work, even though a longer trial is in their favour (and also in the public interest, though that's not Defence's primary interest, which is their clients). It may seem like it was "victory" for them, by getting a more realistic term of trial, which any effort from them to obtain seems to have been harshly denied during the first heady days of ACJ Mackenzie's tenure over the case...when she was revelling drunk in the power of her shiny new bench. She may have realized different, especially once realizing the ramifying nature of the evidence and the likely arguments (which, if she were the same person as Justice Mackenzie and had actually already sat through months upon months of complicated evidence and argument.
But I think, cynically British Columbian to the bone as I am and under the assumption that the BC Liberals are a sort of wicked hybrid of the Chamber of Commerce and the Knights Templar, that this mistrial and longer new trial has been instigated by the Campbellites....no matter what was said in the absence of the jury that-we-might-not-hear-it. I'm assuming that's because of some shift of strategy and maybe also so they can shove aside anything Martyn Brown did, or didn't, say.....
cont.
Any sane person familiar with te amount of evidence and the number of listed witnesses, and likely witness, would never have set this trial for six weeks in the first place. I daresay Justice Bennett would never have presumed to set such a short trial term or engage jury members for such a preposterously short trial.
But also maybe it was a setup; so the "Special" Prosecutor and his cronies could find out the Defence strategy, and upon doing so force a mistrial so they could regroup and also coach all their witnesses. Hell, maybe they should all be called to Savary Island just to get their stories straight (="matching" and appropriately evasive).
What I mean is that this could not have been Defence's work, even though a longer trial is in their favour (and also in the public interest, though that's not Defence's primary interest, which is their clients). It may seem like it was "victory" for them, by getting a more realistic term of trial, which any effort from them to obtain seems to have been harshly denied during the first heady days of ACJ Mackenzie's tenure over the case...when she was revelling drunk in the power of her shiny new bench. She may have realized different, especially once realizing the ramifying nature of the evidence and the likely arguments (which, if she were the same person as Justice Mackenzie and had actually already sat through months upon months of complicated evidence and argument.
But I think, cynically British Columbian to the bone as I am and under the assumption that the BC Liberals are a sort of wicked hybrid of the Chamber of Commerce and the Knights Templar, that this mistrial and longer new trial has been instigated by the Campbellites....no matter what was said in the absence of the jury that-we-might-not-hear-it. I'm assuming that's because of some shift of strategy and maybe also so they can shove aside anything Martyn Brown did, or didn't, say.....
cont.
cont.
Since she's declaring a mistrial, isn't this an ideal opportunity to replace the Special Prosecutor? Or if that were done, doesn't it mean a re-opening of the investigation from day one, and no selective charges against only three people involved in what is clearly a widespread and institutionalized criminal activity (the term I'd use is "political racketeering" though that's not a legal definition).
Strikes me also that "treason" is in there somewhere, too.....any offence against public sovereignty by sitting politicians should be dealt with as such. Especially regards the overtly autocratic ones, who behave as if monarchs rather than first ministers.
This is also an attempt to allow the "mainstream" press to find things to divert the mountain attention and awareness of the trial.
How can such a vastly complicated proceeding ever have been confined to an intended six weeks??? The answer, clear as day, is "politics". Trying to get it over and done with.
Congratulations ACJ Mackenzie, you have now just opened a can of gigantic, squirming worms that you will never be able to shut, as you have been (as we read it) ordered to do by those who appointed you. The choice is yours, Ma'am - protect the Premier at the price of justice and democracy and your own reputation - or act in the public interest by allowing no further shenanigans from the Special Prosecutor and recognize that the limelight is going to be on this trial....and if the Big Media won't overturn your publication ban, somebody is going to. And in your capacity as justice and if you really have gone over the evidence, or the wilfully destroyed evidence in particular, then the onus on you is to launch investigations on all the other crimes of process known already, whether illegal lobbying, corrupt bidding processes, destroyed evidence, and contracts which exempt the signee from Canadian law and any legal action should the contract be challenged by later government, or by the disenfranchised public.
Evidently they don't teach much at law school about democratic principle. Not in this country anyway......what's more important? Fine points of procedural law? Or wanton disregard of the law by sitting governments and their financial backers, able to act with impunity because of a coopted judicial system?
This proceeding is doing anything but giving the public confidence in the institutions of the Crown, and those empowered with its authority.
Somewhere between an Old Boys' Club and a ratsnest, is how many see the government of British Columbia. "The Last Colony", founded in corruption and ruled by it since 1858 (or, on the Island, since 1849 and before....)
Since she's declaring a mistrial, isn't this an ideal opportunity to replace the Special Prosecutor? Or if that were done, doesn't it mean a re-opening of the investigation from day one, and no selective charges against only three people involved in what is clearly a widespread and institutionalized criminal activity (the term I'd use is "political racketeering" though that's not a legal definition).
Strikes me also that "treason" is in there somewhere, too.....any offence against public sovereignty by sitting politicians should be dealt with as such. Especially regards the overtly autocratic ones, who behave as if monarchs rather than first ministers.
This is also an attempt to allow the "mainstream" press to find things to divert the mountain attention and awareness of the trial.
How can such a vastly complicated proceeding ever have been confined to an intended six weeks??? The answer, clear as day, is "politics". Trying to get it over and done with.
Congratulations ACJ Mackenzie, you have now just opened a can of gigantic, squirming worms that you will never be able to shut, as you have been (as we read it) ordered to do by those who appointed you. The choice is yours, Ma'am - protect the Premier at the price of justice and democracy and your own reputation - or act in the public interest by allowing no further shenanigans from the Special Prosecutor and recognize that the limelight is going to be on this trial....and if the Big Media won't overturn your publication ban, somebody is going to. And in your capacity as justice and if you really have gone over the evidence, or the wilfully destroyed evidence in particular, then the onus on you is to launch investigations on all the other crimes of process known already, whether illegal lobbying, corrupt bidding processes, destroyed evidence, and contracts which exempt the signee from Canadian law and any legal action should the contract be challenged by later government, or by the disenfranchised public.
Evidently they don't teach much at law school about democratic principle. Not in this country anyway......what's more important? Fine points of procedural law? Or wanton disregard of the law by sitting governments and their financial backers, able to act with impunity because of a coopted judicial system?
This proceeding is doing anything but giving the public confidence in the institutions of the Crown, and those empowered with its authority.
Somewhere between an Old Boys' Club and a ratsnest, is how many see the government of British Columbia. "The Last Colony", founded in corruption and ruled by it since 1858 (or, on the Island, since 1849 and before....)
NINE F _ _ _ ING MONTHS!
MISTRIAL . . . F _ _ _ !!
The GREAT SATAN
MISTRIAL . . . F _ _ _ !!
The GREAT SATAN
# posted by : June 7, 2010 at 9:17 p.m.
: June 7, 2010 at 9:17 p.m.
A few weeks ago on our blog, i accused Gordon Campbell of being a NWO(New World Order)Shill.
After hearing through the accredited corporate mainstream media, that Gordo was invited and attended the Bilderberg Group Conference in Spain this weekend, i now feel vindicated. Along with my vindication, i am concerned with the future prosperity of our province and country.
I am not going to get into what the Bilderberg group represents. I encourage all of you to research it yourselves. Keep in mind you will not find jack or the truth via MSM. I recommend investigative journalist (with a doctorate in Bilderberg) Jim Tucker as a good start.
As for the trial. Justice will not be served. Gordo and his stooges will not be held accountable for stealing BC Rail from the people of British Columbia. Great Satan is bang on. This trial has been rigged from the very beginning and the 'raid' was never suppose to happen.
Gordo is a "made" man. Made of Teflon that is. As for whether Basi and Virk are guilty or not guilty for being money hungry and lacking intergity is irrelevant.
After hearing through the accredited corporate mainstream media, that Gordo was invited and attended the Bilderberg Group Conference in Spain this weekend, i now feel vindicated. Along with my vindication, i am concerned with the future prosperity of our province and country.
I am not going to get into what the Bilderberg group represents. I encourage all of you to research it yourselves. Keep in mind you will not find jack or the truth via MSM. I recommend investigative journalist (with a doctorate in Bilderberg) Jim Tucker as a good start.
As for the trial. Justice will not be served. Gordo and his stooges will not be held accountable for stealing BC Rail from the people of British Columbia. Great Satan is bang on. This trial has been rigged from the very beginning and the 'raid' was never suppose to happen.
Gordo is a "made" man. Made of Teflon that is. As for whether Basi and Virk are guilty or not guilty for being money hungry and lacking intergity is irrelevant.
# posted by : June 7, 2010 at 10:56 p.m.
: June 7, 2010 at 10:56 p.m.
http://www.infowars.com/former-nato-secretary-general-admits-bilderberg-sets-global-policy/
# posted by : June 7, 2010 at 10:58 p.m.
: June 7, 2010 at 10:58 p.m.
Thank you, Robin.
After Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie accepted her nice promotion to Assistant Chief Justice . . .
. . . after replacing Madam Bennett on this 'smoke & mirrors' trial . .
I strongly suggest that the crafted "publication ban" wasn't really Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie call - after all, she is is on the end of a 'club' string puller, bought and paid for at every juncture.
It's all about the Club's 'code' of conduct, don't you think?
After Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie accepted her nice promotion to Assistant Chief Justice . . .
. . . after replacing Madam Bennett on this 'smoke & mirrors' trial . .
I strongly suggest that the crafted "publication ban" wasn't really Madam Justice Anne MacKenzie call - after all, she is is on the end of a 'club' string puller, bought and paid for at every juncture.
It's all about the Club's 'code' of conduct, don't you think?
# posted by : June 8, 2010 at 12:11 a.m.
: June 8, 2010 at 12:11 a.m.
Thanks for the tip, CC.
Here's the URL for that complete story.
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Campbell+mingles+with+world+elite+private+meeting/3125902/story.html
It's strange that Campbell blabs about all the things they talked about ... world issues ... without mentioning the huge menace of Organized Crime.
.
Here's the URL for that complete story.
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Campbell+mingles+with+world+elite+private+meeting/3125902/story.html
It's strange that Campbell blabs about all the things they talked about ... world issues ... without mentioning the huge menace of Organized Crime.
.
My first thoughts.....our courts are not built to accomadate this level of corruption...
islandcynic
islandcynic
# posted by : June 8, 2010 at 5:00 a.m.
: June 8, 2010 at 5:00 a.m.
This is exactly the strategy from the Special Prosecutor.
"But also maybe it was a setup; so the "Special" Prosecutor and his cronies could find out the Defence strategy, and upon doing so force a mistrial so they could regroup and also coach all their witnesses."
"But also maybe it was a setup; so the "Special" Prosecutor and his cronies could find out the Defence strategy, and upon doing so force a mistrial so they could regroup and also coach all their witnesses."
# posted by : June 8, 2010 at 8:52 a.m.
: June 8, 2010 at 8:52 a.m.
Ballz - the only reason Campbell would have been invited to mix and mingle with the likes of Kissinger et al is because he has already proven beyond doubt, he is more than capable of decimating an entire population for his own ends. In true Bilderberg Style!
An evil man, for an evil group...what more could one ask for?
An evil man, for an evil group...what more could one ask for?
# posted by : June 8, 2010 at 10:58 a.m.
: June 8, 2010 at 10:58 a.m.
Great Job Robin - I appreciate the hard work and all your efforts to continue to hold this trial to account.
# posted by : June 8, 2010 at 11:49 a.m.
: June 8, 2010 at 11:49 a.m.
There is something about the choice of the words "the surprise" in the phrase "But now the surprise."
Somehow it makes my radar go off.
Because I've heard that exact phrase at so many planned events.
It is an odd choice of words, I think....or maybe... maybe...on second thought, it is quite appropriate and fitting.
Post a Comment
Somehow it makes my radar go off.
Because I've heard that exact phrase at so many planned events.
It is an odd choice of words, I think....or maybe... maybe...on second thought, it is quite appropriate and fitting.
# posted by : June 8, 2010 at 12:38 p.m.
: June 8, 2010 at 12:38 p.m. << Home
