Sunday, January 16, 2011


Why Solicitor-General Rich Coleman was the go-to-guy in the Raid on the BC Legislature

BC Mary comment: Anonymous has left a new comment which is well worth following up. There's a segment by then-Chief Constable Paul Battershill dated November 30, 2003, which introduces PRIME BC, the electronic sharing of police information ...

Anonymous writes:

Pages 8 and 9 of this document, from November 2003, explains clearly in Model A and Model B why the Solicitor General was the go-to-guy in the Raid on the BC Legislature.

Read this document HERE:


'They' always check you out first Mary. The page has been removed already.
Hi Mary, as you noted a few days ago, Norm Farrell over at Northern Insights has written an important story about another BC Supreme Court judge, Justice Peter Leask, and his conduct in handling trials of major drug figures.

Today Norm has another startling story about the most recent incident of police brutality in BC, and it's a very good indictment of mainstream media reporting of a current issue. I think this shows the future place of citizen bloggers, the only source of meaningful, concrete and trust-worthy news.

As Horgan's the only BC political candidate who has called for a full inquiry, may I be permitted to urge your readers to consider this email that I got yesterday from the Horgan leadership campaign? I think it would be very worthwhile to help counter the efforts of the mainstream media to marginalize Horgan.

The email said:

Think of five friends who share our desire for pragmatic, honest leadership that puts the environment and people first. Now forward this e-mail to them and ask them to go to
and sign up right away.

...Please don't delay, we have just 48 hours left to bring in new members to elect John Horgan to lead the BC New Democrats to government in the next election.
Copy and paste. It always works for me. I can't tell why the links often don't work but I suspect it is something to do with Google.
I hope someone kept a copy of that Document obviously they didnt like Us seeing it.
The page you requested is no longer available or has been moved.
Sorry the link did not work, but I pasted the URL and it did work.

Thanks for repeating that advice ...

it's true, sometimes the link is exactly like the one provided at source, but it brings up a faulty result.

That's why I started pasting in the original full link, in fact.

Thanks, all, for your patience.
BC people, may have to run an underground newspaper, as they did in WW11 to warn the citizens of the Nazi's agenda. If there is one thing, the BC Liberals hate, it is the truth about themselves. Then the media, propaganda machine is put into use, and the dirty tactics, really get into gear. We always know ahead of time, what the BC Liberals will do, by any given circumstance. All we have to do is, expect the worst from them. We are then, never disappointed.
Anonymous 10:32,

Gee ... that's what we've been doing for the past 5 years ... running a news service and warning the citizens !!
And thank goodness you have been. Some (a lot!) people are slow to catch on. That's what worries me - there are still a huge number of taxpayers that are oblivious to this issue.
Did you notice on Model A and B that there's no box that covers Special Prosecutor.
"there are still a huge number of taxpayers that are oblivious to this issue."

But hey, as long as they can afford a new flat screen TeeVee (assembled by slave labor elsewhere) everything is cool!
Dear BC Mary,

My apologies, for I left your blog to spend an hour with Knowledge Network to view William Garrow, Sir William Garrow KC SL PC FRS. Garrow is also known for his impact on the rules of evidence, coining the "best evidence rule."

In light, BC Mary, of the Crown Special Prosecutor wishing to destroy all evidence turned over to the Defense during the trial of the Raid on the BC Rail..... whatever happened to the .........
"Best Evidence Rule is a common law rule of evidence which can be traced back at least as far as the 18th century. In Omychund v Barker (1745) 1 Atk, 21, 49; 26 ER 15, 33, Lord Harwicke stated that no evidence was admissible unless it was "the best that the nature of the case will allow". The general rule is that secondary evidence, such as a copy or facsimile, will be not admissible if an original document exists, and is not unavailable due to destruction or other circumstances indicating unavailability.

The rationale for the best evidence rule can be understood from the context in which it arose: in the eighteenth century a copy was usually made by hand by a clerk (or even a litigant). The best evidence rule was predicated on the assumption that, if the original was not produced, there was a significant chance of error or fraud in relying on such a copy....." SNIP

How could Associate Justice MacKenzie have allowed copies..... from the BC Liberal government and deny the Defense only the originals, for presentation to Court Room #54?

PS I can hardly wait for next week's performance on Channel 5!
Post a Comment

<< Home