Wednesday, March 02, 2011
The OPEN COURT PRINCIPLE, Ms Winteringham, Ms MacKay
.
BC Mary comment: It was after I posted this Anonymous comment about two of the oh-so-special prosecutors -- Ms Winteringham and Ms MacKay -- who have now set-up a law office in The Landing owned by David McLean ...
Comment:
Winteringham MacKay George Law Corp
Suite 620
T (604) 659-6060
Comment HERE.
http://www.the-landing.com/commercial.html
And, I might as well add that CN has an office in The Landing as well:
Canadian National
Suite 420
T (604) 665-4208
www.cn.ca
BC Mary says: That's when our excellent friend, "E.M.", joined in to report as follows for our improved understanding of The Open Court Principle:
Quote:
I found that Janet Winteringham is assisting with West Coast LEAF intervening in polygamy reference question “In Bountiful and elsewhere, women and girls live with gender inequality because of the practice of polygamy. To date, the polygamy provisions have been largely ignored in this province,” says Winteringham. “We are assisting West Coast LEAF because we are committed to ensuring that the polygamy provision is enforced in communities like Bountiful so as to prevent any further exploitation of women and girls.”
West Coast LEAF was granted leave to intervene in the Reference on the constitutionality of section 293 of the Criminal Code on February 16, 2010.
"[4] During oral submissions, the applicants clarified that it was their intention that the identities of their witnesses would be disclosed to the Court and that any witness who testified behind a screen would also be visible to the Court.
[5] The Attorney General of British Columbia (the “AG BC”) and the Attorney General of Canada (the “AG Canada”) vigorously oppose this application. They argue that the relief sought would fundamentally degrade the integrity of the proceedings and unjustifiably violate the open court principle.
Ha ha ha
[50] As noted, the AG BC relies on the Dagenais/Mentuck analysis, which applies to applications which seek to restrict the openness of judicial proceedings.
ha ha ha
[65] More unusual still is the fact that the AG BC has initiated this reference in a trial court, as opposed to an appellate court where virtually every other reference in this country has been brought.
You can read more about the references the AG of BC and Canada use references to the OPEN COURT PRINCIPLE.
Click HERE.
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/10/13/2010BCSC1351cor1.htm
Later, E.M. sent this ...
When I was in Court Feb 16th, 2011, Justice Mac mentioned some new rules coming any day. They relate to Principle of Open Court (ha ha ha )
I found this notice February 17th
17 February 2011
Vancouver -- The Provincial Court of British Columbia has today posted on its website the Court’s Policies regarding Public and Media Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia. The policies, which will take effect on February 28, 2011, can be found at the following link on the court's website: Policies regarding Public Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia.
The policies seek to appropriately balance the vitally important principle of an open court with the judiciary's overall responsibility for the fair administration of justice in individual cases.
As the Supreme Court of Canada recently noted:
The open court principle is of crucial importance in a democratic society. It ensures that citizens have access to the courts and can, as a result, comment on how courts operate and on proceedings that take place in them. Public access to the courts also guarantees the integrity of judicial processes inasmuch as the transparency that flows from access ensures that justice is rendered in a manner that is not arbitrary, but is in accordance with the rule of law.
(CBC v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 2, para. 1)
The policies posted today cover such matters as:
access to courthouses and courtrooms;
access to court records;
access to digital audio recordings of proceedings;
televising court proceedings; and
publication bans.
The policy is an evolving document which I expect will continue to be the subject of further development through discussion with the public and the media. Today's policy document is a significant and helpful step in the ongoing process of ensuring an open and accessible court.
Thomas J. Crabtree
Chief Judge
34 page document which I am sure this is what She spoke of
Policies regarding public and media access in the
Provincial Court of British Columbia [14 February 2011]
http://www.provincialcourt.bc.ca/downloads/pdf/Media%20Policy%20Regarding%20Public%20and%20Media%20Access.pdf
BC Mary comment: It was after I posted this Anonymous comment about two of the oh-so-special prosecutors -- Ms Winteringham and Ms MacKay -- who have now set-up a law office in The Landing owned by David McLean ...
Comment:
Winteringham MacKay George Law Corp
Suite 620
T (604) 659-6060
Comment HERE.
http://www.the-landing.com/commercial.html
And, I might as well add that CN has an office in The Landing as well:
Canadian National
Suite 420
T (604) 665-4208
www.cn.ca
___________
Quote:
I found that Janet Winteringham is assisting with West Coast LEAF intervening in polygamy reference question “In Bountiful and elsewhere, women and girls live with gender inequality because of the practice of polygamy. To date, the polygamy provisions have been largely ignored in this province,” says Winteringham. “We are assisting West Coast LEAF because we are committed to ensuring that the polygamy provision is enforced in communities like Bountiful so as to prevent any further exploitation of women and girls.”
----
West Coast LEAF was granted leave to intervene in the Reference on the constitutionality of section 293 of the Criminal Code on February 16, 2010.
--------
Quick read of some of the decision regarding applications that the witnesses be able to give evidence anonymously."[4] During oral submissions, the applicants clarified that it was their intention that the identities of their witnesses would be disclosed to the Court and that any witness who testified behind a screen would also be visible to the Court.
[5] The Attorney General of British Columbia (the “AG BC”) and the Attorney General of Canada (the “AG Canada”) vigorously oppose this application. They argue that the relief sought would fundamentally degrade the integrity of the proceedings and unjustifiably violate the open court principle.
Ha ha ha
[50] As noted, the AG BC relies on the Dagenais/Mentuck analysis, which applies to applications which seek to restrict the openness of judicial proceedings.
ha ha ha
[65] More unusual still is the fact that the AG BC has initiated this reference in a trial court, as opposed to an appellate court where virtually every other reference in this country has been brought.
You can read more about the references the AG of BC and Canada use references to the OPEN COURT PRINCIPLE.
Click HERE.
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/10/13/2010BCSC1351cor1.htm
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Later, E.M. sent this ...
When I was in Court Feb 16th, 2011, Justice Mac mentioned some new rules coming any day. They relate to Principle of Open Court (ha ha ha )
I found this notice February 17th
17 February 2011
Vancouver -- The Provincial Court of British Columbia has today posted on its website the Court’s Policies regarding Public and Media Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia. The policies, which will take effect on February 28, 2011, can be found at the following link on the court's website: Policies regarding Public Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia.
The policies seek to appropriately balance the vitally important principle of an open court with the judiciary's overall responsibility for the fair administration of justice in individual cases.
As the Supreme Court of Canada recently noted:
The open court principle is of crucial importance in a democratic society. It ensures that citizens have access to the courts and can, as a result, comment on how courts operate and on proceedings that take place in them. Public access to the courts also guarantees the integrity of judicial processes inasmuch as the transparency that flows from access ensures that justice is rendered in a manner that is not arbitrary, but is in accordance with the rule of law.
(CBC v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 2, para. 1)
The policies posted today cover such matters as:
access to courthouses and courtrooms;
access to court records;
access to digital audio recordings of proceedings;
televising court proceedings; and
publication bans.
The policy is an evolving document which I expect will continue to be the subject of further development through discussion with the public and the media. Today's policy document is a significant and helpful step in the ongoing process of ensuring an open and accessible court.
Thomas J. Crabtree
Chief Judge
34 page document which I am sure this is what She spoke of
Policies regarding public and media access in the
Provincial Court of British Columbia [14 February 2011]
http://www.provincialcourt.bc.ca/downloads/pdf/Media%20Policy%20Regarding%20Public%20and%20Media%20Access.pdf
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
To "Anonymous" and "E.M.", many thanks!
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Special treat: lovely BC photos including BC Rail in its vital roles:
Railfan.net Forums - Photos - BC RR Action; Displays!
BC Rail Budd cars near Shannon Falls just south of Squamish heading north. ... A look at BC Rail without seeing the Royal Hudson would be incomplete...
Click HERE.
http://forums.railfan.net/forums.cgi?board=BC&action=display&num=1143347745&start=803
forums.railfan.net/forums.cgi?board=BC&action...
Railfan.net Forums - Photos - BC RR Action; Displays!
BC Rail Budd cars near Shannon Falls just south of Squamish heading north. ... A look at BC Rail without seeing the Royal Hudson would be incomplete...
Click HERE.
http://forums.railfan.net/forums.cgi?board=BC&action=display&num=1143347745&start=803
forums.railfan.net/forums.cgi?board=BC&action...
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Comments:
<< Home
When I was in Court Feb 16th,2011, Justice Mac mentioned some new rules coming any day. They relate to Principle of Open Court (ha ha ha )
I found this notice February 17th
17 February 2011
Vancouver -- The Provincial Court of British Columbia has today posted on its website the Court’s Policies regarding Public and Media Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia. The policies, which will take effect on February 28, 2011, can be found at the following link on the court's website: Policies regarding Public Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia.
The policies seek to appropriately balance the vitally important principle of an open court with the judiciary's overall responsibility for the fair administration of justice in individual cases.
As the Supreme Court of Canada recently noted:
The open court principle is of crucial importance in a democratic society. It ensures that citizens have access to the courts and can, as a result, comment on how courts operate and on proceedings that take place in them. Public access to the courts also guarantees the integrity of judicial processes inasmuch as the transparency that flows from access ensures that justice is rendered in a manner that is not arbitrary, but is in accordance with the rule of law.
(CBC v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 2, para. 1)
The policies posted today cover such matters as:
access to courthouses and courtrooms;
access to court records;
access to digital audio recordings of proceedings;
televising court proceedings; and
publication bans.
The policy is an evolving document which I expect will continue to be the subject of further development through discussion with the public and the media. Today's policy document is a significant and helpful step in the ongoing process of ensuring an open and accessible court.
Thomas J. Crabtree
Chief Judge
34 page document which I am sure this is what She spoke of
Policies regarding public and media access in the
Provincial Court of British Columbia [14 February 2011]
http://www.provincialcourt.bc.ca/downloads/pdf/Media%20Policy%20Regarding%20Public%20and%20Media%20Access.pdf
I found this notice February 17th
17 February 2011
Vancouver -- The Provincial Court of British Columbia has today posted on its website the Court’s Policies regarding Public and Media Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia. The policies, which will take effect on February 28, 2011, can be found at the following link on the court's website: Policies regarding Public Access in the Provincial Court of British Columbia.
The policies seek to appropriately balance the vitally important principle of an open court with the judiciary's overall responsibility for the fair administration of justice in individual cases.
As the Supreme Court of Canada recently noted:
The open court principle is of crucial importance in a democratic society. It ensures that citizens have access to the courts and can, as a result, comment on how courts operate and on proceedings that take place in them. Public access to the courts also guarantees the integrity of judicial processes inasmuch as the transparency that flows from access ensures that justice is rendered in a manner that is not arbitrary, but is in accordance with the rule of law.
(CBC v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 2, para. 1)
The policies posted today cover such matters as:
access to courthouses and courtrooms;
access to court records;
access to digital audio recordings of proceedings;
televising court proceedings; and
publication bans.
The policy is an evolving document which I expect will continue to be the subject of further development through discussion with the public and the media. Today's policy document is a significant and helpful step in the ongoing process of ensuring an open and accessible court.
Thomas J. Crabtree
Chief Judge
34 page document which I am sure this is what She spoke of
Policies regarding public and media access in the
Provincial Court of British Columbia [14 February 2011]
http://www.provincialcourt.bc.ca/downloads/pdf/Media%20Policy%20Regarding%20Public%20and%20Media%20Access.pdf
Hello dude! I really appreciate what you’re posting here. Keep posting that way.
# posted by 
: March 2, 2011 at 2:59 p.m.
: March 2, 2011 at 2:59 p.m.
Too bad this only applies to courts of Provincial jurisdiction - the Supreme Court (where Basi and Virk were heard) makes (as we all know) pretty much its own rules.
It's a bird of quite another feather - as Madame Justice Mackenzie will attest....
It's a bird of quite another feather - as Madame Justice Mackenzie will attest....
Another sick joke, on one hand winterhambone protects the secret witness in basi virk... Now she is poligamies savior?
# posted by : March 2, 2011 at 6:24 p.m.
: March 2, 2011 at 6:24 p.m.
It took me 5 weeks to be able to hear a masters proceeding to which I was a party. The fact that I said I was gathering evidence in support of an exercise of Complaint by Right, actually slowed down release.
Read the fine print in both PCBC and SCBC releases, and you can see judicial claims of "jurisdiction" over Registry property. And they assign the AGBC with a caretaker role. There is no Constitutional or Statutory basis for that claim. Court records are Public property. At last count, court officers form less than 0.04% of the population. And judicial officers Extorted - yah I mean that in a Criminal Code sense - pensions equal to 67% of their wages over their last 10 years on the Bench.
Want more stats? Government parties win nearly 100% of motion hearings and trials. In fact, the SCBC holds less than 500 trials out of over 60,000 registrations each year. Court "masters" - generally appointed after service in the chief justices office - inflict systemic abuse on persons who couldn't pay the standard $5-10,000 retainer fees, resulting from Law Society service to the profession. Court masters are prohibited from finalizing cases; they do it anyway. And that is fine with our influential "Opposition" goofs who served as court-officers: Jenny Kwan; Mike Farnsworth; Leonard Krog. They love a status quo that disserves 99.6% of the Population.
On Jan W going to the Civil Bar: in the 2-tier Crown Counsel system, numerous barely post-pubescent attornies are so employed, would gladly leave same. I am sure Jan smiled in relief when she climbed out of that amoral swamp.
Post a Comment
Read the fine print in both PCBC and SCBC releases, and you can see judicial claims of "jurisdiction" over Registry property. And they assign the AGBC with a caretaker role. There is no Constitutional or Statutory basis for that claim. Court records are Public property. At last count, court officers form less than 0.04% of the population. And judicial officers Extorted - yah I mean that in a Criminal Code sense - pensions equal to 67% of their wages over their last 10 years on the Bench.
Want more stats? Government parties win nearly 100% of motion hearings and trials. In fact, the SCBC holds less than 500 trials out of over 60,000 registrations each year. Court "masters" - generally appointed after service in the chief justices office - inflict systemic abuse on persons who couldn't pay the standard $5-10,000 retainer fees, resulting from Law Society service to the profession. Court masters are prohibited from finalizing cases; they do it anyway. And that is fine with our influential "Opposition" goofs who served as court-officers: Jenny Kwan; Mike Farnsworth; Leonard Krog. They love a status quo that disserves 99.6% of the Population.
On Jan W going to the Civil Bar: in the 2-tier Crown Counsel system, numerous barely post-pubescent attornies are so employed, would gladly leave same. I am sure Jan smiled in relief when she climbed out of that amoral swamp.
# posted by : March 8, 2011 at 2:58 a.m.
: March 8, 2011 at 2:58 a.m. << Home
