Monday, September 27, 2010
Monday in BC Supreme Courtroom 54 - the BC Rail Political Corruption Trial interrupted
.
By Robin Mathews
Mon., September 27, 2010
The morning was taken up mostly with jury-absent argument and discussion which should be available to the public, but isn't because of the draconian publication ban put in place by Associate Chief Justice Anne Mackenzie.
There are, doubtless, things which - from time to time - need to be kept from immediate release to the public. Most of the things happening now without the presence of the jury are not - as I see it - of that nature. But all is banned in a sweeping, absurd, defiance of the "Open Court" principle ... as I observe the proceedings.
The daily transcript of proceedings, which should be available to all of the public in an "Open Court", is never available, either. That denial of information, I insist, is a violation of the public's freedom to have information about its business, which this Supreme Court and the government of Gordon Campbell seem, almost, to work together to deny the public.
Clearly, a broom needs to sweep through the B.C. Supreme Court. Normally, it would be used by a concerned Attorney General. But Michael de Jong who was responsible for the "cover-up" review of the Special Prosecutor appointment process won't be the person. The failure of that "review" to mention the misuse of the Special Prosecutor appointment process by former Attorney General Wally Oppal and the wrongful appointment of William Berardino as Special Prosecutor in the present BC Rail Scandal trial says everything that needs to be said about it. A cover-up.
This morning's procedure opened with the announcement that Dave Basi, accused, could not be in the court because of illness. And so the jury was dismissed.
Then the publication ban events took place.
Court (if Dave Basi returns) meets tomorrow.
By Robin Mathews
Mon., September 27, 2010
The morning was taken up mostly with jury-absent argument and discussion which should be available to the public, but isn't because of the draconian publication ban put in place by Associate Chief Justice Anne Mackenzie.
There are, doubtless, things which - from time to time - need to be kept from immediate release to the public. Most of the things happening now without the presence of the jury are not - as I see it - of that nature. But all is banned in a sweeping, absurd, defiance of the "Open Court" principle ... as I observe the proceedings.
The daily transcript of proceedings, which should be available to all of the public in an "Open Court", is never available, either. That denial of information, I insist, is a violation of the public's freedom to have information about its business, which this Supreme Court and the government of Gordon Campbell seem, almost, to work together to deny the public.
Clearly, a broom needs to sweep through the B.C. Supreme Court. Normally, it would be used by a concerned Attorney General. But Michael de Jong who was responsible for the "cover-up" review of the Special Prosecutor appointment process won't be the person. The failure of that "review" to mention the misuse of the Special Prosecutor appointment process by former Attorney General Wally Oppal and the wrongful appointment of William Berardino as Special Prosecutor in the present BC Rail Scandal trial says everything that needs to be said about it. A cover-up.
This morning's procedure opened with the announcement that Dave Basi, accused, could not be in the court because of illness. And so the jury was dismissed.
Then the publication ban events took place.
Court (if Dave Basi returns) meets tomorrow.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Optically unfortunate: BC Rail, CN and Patrick Kinsella
Thursday’s handover from Virk’s lawyer, Kevin McCullough, to David Basi’s lawyer, Michael Bolton, was seamless as one dropped and the other picked up the CN thread.
Not surprisingly the name of BC Liberal campaign co-chair Patrick Kinsella came up.
“Mr. Kinsella and his company were paid about $300 thousand to in assisting in divesting of its freight operations. That’s a lot being paid to the man who ran the election campaign” Boulton asked. “It’s a lot of money, yes” replied Kenning.
And what did Kinsella do for the $300 K? “I don’t know,” said evaluation committee member and BCR audit chair Brian Kenning.
According to Kenning, Board Chair John McLernon and BCR CEO Bob Phillips told the board they were hiring Kinsella to “provide guidance on how to deal with government in context with core review.” When Boulton reminded Kenning that BC Rail executives were already dealing directly with Brenda Eaton in the Premier’s office on the core review Kenning offered, “to be honest I don’t know what was in the minds of McLernon and Philllips.” {Snip} ...
Around three o’clock Boulton raised the infamous exchange between Kevin Mahoney and John McLernon regarding a telephone call from Kinsella, when it looked like the CN deal was going south. “Did you become aware that Mahoney went to Patrick Kinsella to find out what CNs issues were,” Boulton asked? “Can you explain why Kevin Mahoney thought it was a good idea to check with Patrick Kinsella to see what Mr. McLean was concerned about?”
The Court adjourned and left the question hanging. But it’s clear we’ll be hearing much more about Mr. Kinsella’s role in this trial. You can bet the mortgage money that ‘Who’s side was Mr. Kinsella really on,’ will become a steady theme of this trial.
Optically unfortunate: BC Rail, CN and Patrick Kinsella
The Real Story - September 27, 2010 by Ian
Thursday’s handover from Virk’s lawyer, Kevin McCullough, to David Basi’s lawyer, Michael Bolton, was seamless as one dropped and the other picked up the CN thread.
Not surprisingly the name of BC Liberal campaign co-chair Patrick Kinsella came up.
“Mr. Kinsella and his company were paid about $300 thousand to in assisting in divesting of its freight operations. That’s a lot being paid to the man who ran the election campaign” Boulton asked. “It’s a lot of money, yes” replied Kenning.
And what did Kinsella do for the $300 K? “I don’t know,” said evaluation committee member and BCR audit chair Brian Kenning.
According to Kenning, Board Chair John McLernon and BCR CEO Bob Phillips told the board they were hiring Kinsella to “provide guidance on how to deal with government in context with core review.” When Boulton reminded Kenning that BC Rail executives were already dealing directly with Brenda Eaton in the Premier’s office on the core review Kenning offered, “to be honest I don’t know what was in the minds of McLernon and Philllips.” {Snip} ...
Around three o’clock Boulton raised the infamous exchange between Kevin Mahoney and John McLernon regarding a telephone call from Kinsella, when it looked like the CN deal was going south. “Did you become aware that Mahoney went to Patrick Kinsella to find out what CNs issues were,” Boulton asked? “Can you explain why Kevin Mahoney thought it was a good idea to check with Patrick Kinsella to see what Mr. McLean was concerned about?”
The Court adjourned and left the question hanging. But it’s clear we’ll be hearing much more about Mr. Kinsella’s role in this trial. You can bet the mortgage money that ‘Who’s side was Mr. Kinsella really on,’ will become a steady theme of this trial.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Comments:
<< Home
These people are apparently suffering severe immune system malfuction, (which may or may not include memory impairment). Let's all send them some Oil of Oregano or chicken soup for the cerebellum or some such thing!
Come hell or high water, there will be something happening in Court room #54 tomorrow. If its not Mr. Kenning answering more questions from Mr. Bolton, for Dave Basi (if he's well enough), there will be more of the stuff that is protected by a publication ban that Robin speaks so much of.
# posted by 
: September 27, 2010 at 5:14 p.m.
: September 27, 2010 at 5:14 p.m.
All the more reason to put the jury and the defendants into quarantine, instead of the public.....
Why is it that the jury gets dismissed if Dave Basi has the runs? Or a head cold or whatever? I can understand if one of the jury is sick, but how does a defendant's being ill warrant dismissal of the jury?? I mean, if the defendant is sick, and the proceedings should not go on without him, shouldn't court itself be adjourned, and its business be conducted in front of the jury? Or was this explicitly stuff that could only be discussed in the absence of the jury, whose virgin ears must be protected from important but supposedly unrelated facts at all costs?
I hope the jury realize they are being used as political puppets in a very explicit punch and judy show.
Why is it that the jury gets dismissed if Dave Basi has the runs? Or a head cold or whatever? I can understand if one of the jury is sick, but how does a defendant's being ill warrant dismissal of the jury?? I mean, if the defendant is sick, and the proceedings should not go on without him, shouldn't court itself be adjourned, and its business be conducted in front of the jury? Or was this explicitly stuff that could only be discussed in the absence of the jury, whose virgin ears must be protected from important but supposedly unrelated facts at all costs?
I hope the jury realize they are being used as political puppets in a very explicit punch and judy show.
CBC is now reporting that Wally Oppal will be heading the Pickton inquiry: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/09/27/bc-pickton-inquiry-tba.html
Unbelievable.
Unbelievable.
# posted by : September 27, 2010 at 7:53 p.m.
: September 27, 2010 at 7:53 p.m.
Skookum1 said... I hope the jury realize they are being used as political puppets in a very explicit punch and judy show.
-------------------------------
I agree, if I was on that jury I would find 101 reasons to bale, life's to short to participate in this gong show.
-------------------------------
I agree, if I was on that jury I would find 101 reasons to bale, life's to short to participate in this gong show.
# posted by : September 27, 2010 at 8:12 p.m.
: September 27, 2010 at 8:12 p.m.
Ian, do you think this just about covers it?
Note: "partisan politics" is defined as: In politics, a partisan is a committed member of a party.
Now let me count the members of the party who ........
British Columbia Railway Company - Page 4 - Amended & approved by Board of Directors
Directors and Officers November 5, 2004
Standards of Ethical Conduct
"Political Activities
Every officer is free to participate in political activities. An officer’s political activities, however, must be
clearly separated from activities related to his or her employment or appointment. If engaging in political
activities, officers must remain impartial and retain the perception of impartiality in relation to their duties
and responsibilities to the Company. Officers must not engage in political activities during working hours
or use corporate facilities, equipment, or resources in support of these activities. Partisan politics must not be introduced into the workplace in any way which creates undue or inappropriate influence on
employees within the Company, or persons or business enterprises with whom the Company does business. In order to ensure its independence and objectivity, the Company does not use corporate funds, goods, or services as a contribution to political parties, candidates, campaigns or referenda."
Source: http://bcrco.com/conduct.pdf
Note: "partisan politics" is defined as: In politics, a partisan is a committed member of a party.
Now let me count the members of the party who ........
British Columbia Railway Company - Page 4 - Amended & approved by Board of Directors
Directors and Officers November 5, 2004
Standards of Ethical Conduct
"Political Activities
Every officer is free to participate in political activities. An officer’s political activities, however, must be
clearly separated from activities related to his or her employment or appointment. If engaging in political
activities, officers must remain impartial and retain the perception of impartiality in relation to their duties
and responsibilities to the Company. Officers must not engage in political activities during working hours
or use corporate facilities, equipment, or resources in support of these activities. Partisan politics must not be introduced into the workplace in any way which creates undue or inappropriate influence on
employees within the Company, or persons or business enterprises with whom the Company does business. In order to ensure its independence and objectivity, the Company does not use corporate funds, goods, or services as a contribution to political parties, candidates, campaigns or referenda."
Source: http://bcrco.com/conduct.pdf
It's time We the People start an information picket outside OUR SCofBC
demanding an independent investigation into political interference by gordo's gang and to be concluded by the end of Oct. 2010, just in time to start a RECALL of fiberal dis-honorable mla's!
demanding an independent investigation into political interference by gordo's gang and to be concluded by the end of Oct. 2010, just in time to start a RECALL of fiberal dis-honorable mla's!
# posted by : September 28, 2010 at 2:05 p.m.
: September 28, 2010 at 2:05 p.m.
Anonymous 2:05,
That sounds like a very good plan ...
will you go first? Pick a date, pick a time and place, and let us know.
OK?
Great plan.
.
That sounds like a very good plan ...
will you go first? Pick a date, pick a time and place, and let us know.
OK?
Great plan.
.
Mary, now would be a good time to re-post the material on Kinsella squirming out of the pre-trial hearings, that "third-party" justification et al....
Post a Comment
<< Home
