| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
fourhorses
|
 Posted: 04/ 18/ 08 7:22 pm Post subject: (CHRC files) Jessica Beaumont - The Best Offense: Wink wink. |
 |
|
(CHRC files) Jessica Beaumont - The Best Offense: Wink wink.
The phrase: “The best defense is a good offense.”, is an old sports cliché. For the CHRC, the best offense is to eliminate the respondent’s defense all together. This is not news to readers who have followed along as to the deck stacking in the CHRC vs respondents. Those readers who have been following the saga of the CHRC’s prosecution of hate crimes under s. 13, are well aware that the respondent is not entitled to representation via the CHRC nor legal aid support as is the complainant. Those readers also know that truth is no defense. Most of the readers know that hearsay, double hearsay and triple hearsay can be used against the respondent and that these versions of hearsay are well accepted by the Tribunal.
Most sensible people, even those not following this saga, realize that hearsay, whether single, double or triple, has no place in a court of law. Most reasonable people are not asked for their opinions, however. Some learned individuals have commented on these rules of evidence and procedures and have expressed similar dissention against these kangaroo judicial court proceedings. Some of these learned individuals have considerable background in the legal field. The CHRC even had such a learned individual in Member Dr. Paul Groarke.
Dr. Paul Groarke said: | Quote: | The constitutional issue is whether the Respondent's freedom of expression can be restricted in this kind of way, without the kind of institutional and procedural safeguards that exist in the criminal process. This includes a higher standard of proof, proof of mens rea, and the strict application of the rules of evidence.
source
|
This ruling is included in the binder that goes to the Tribunal hearings, referred to as their Book of Authorities. At least I think it is included. It should be included as Dr. Groarke presided over such a Section 13 case and wrote his decision with those remarks. Since Dr. Groarke’s decision and remarks, we have read numerous case transcript files, but have yet to see the CHRC refer to this decision. Quite curious ! They have referred to others. Not to be burdened by such trivial pursuits as outlined by Dr, Groarke, the CHRC appears to have enlisted a new tool in their arsenal against Freedom of Speech. One such tool is taking the respondent’s defense. A perfect game scenario ! Strip the respondent of their defense plans, read them, then let the CHRC offense roll over them. Almost like shooting fish in a barrel, except the fish can’t move around. Sucks to be a fish at the Star Chamber, eh ?
Does this sound too good to be true for you proponents of government control over our speech and thoughts ? Well it’s not. This new tool is alive and doing well in Ottawa. It has been implemented, tried and found to yield very satisfactory results. In fact the results were so encouraging, the CHRC invoked Section 37 of the Evidence Act to shield this secret technique from the respondents and public’s eye. They called it as part of their “Investigative Techniques”. Oh, just the things you don’t need to know, folks.
The CHRC, which by the way, is your Government of Canada, tried this tool out in the Jessica Beaumont case. They took her defense. They took her legal defense files. We can scroll back through time on the internet. We can see trails. We can read documents. The internet has become a horrible place for those wishing to restrict certain websites. We can read the trail of evidence. Sometimes this isn’t very pretty. Sometimes, it is downright frightening, especially when we see the hand of the Government of Canada at work. We can see this trail in the Jessica Beaumont case rather clearly. We can see the hand of the Government of Canada, seizing someone’s legal defense files. We can see the hand of the Government of Canada through the CHRC acting in someone’s best interest. It is not the citizens of this country. That is, unless the citizens choose tyranny over freedom.
Jessica Beaumont was a credible witness at her hearing at the Star Chamber. This is noted in the transcripts and the rulings of Member Hadjis, who sentenced Jessica to a lifetime ban of politically incorrect web posting. A Lifetime Ban ! Permanent. Forever ! The transcripts show that Jessica did not try to weasel out of what she was accused of posting. She stood firm. She showed backbone. She admitted to almost all the heretical thoughts to which she was accused. She opposed a couple minor postings which Hadjis notes in his ruling. Jessica was honest, credible and forthright on the stand. She was unwavering.
Jessica Beaumont was a stickler for her beliefs. She was also a stickler for details. After her home was raided by the RCMP, the local newspaper ran an article that cast her and her boyfriend in the light as neo-Nazis, far right wingers. They reported his heritage incorrectly as English-Scotish. Jessica wrote them to correct this as boyfriend Donnelly being Irish. Jessica also wrote another letter to the newspaper, correcting them on other mistakes in their reporting about the RCMP raid. Jessica was a stickler for correct facts and details.
Jessica scribed her conversation with the police who raided her home on July 27, 2006. She forwarded her transcript to Paul Fromm, who posted it on August 3, 2006.
Paul Fromm posted: | Quote: | The Police Raid on Jessy & Der Totenkopf -- In Their Own Words
July 27, 2006
Jessica’s conversation with Cpl. Sean McGowan (BC Hate Crime Team “E” Division Major Crime Section)
…..
Jessica Beaumont: “What about our CHRC stuff? Did you take any of that as it is needed for our legal defense; so, if you took anything for the CHRC I will need it back before you leave.”
Police Officer Caprarie: “No, we left everything for the CHRC.”
Police Seargent McGowan: “You can now enter the premises”
source
|
Jessica related to Fromm what was taken by the police from her home, after she and her boyfriend were allowed back in. This was also posted on August 3, 2006.
Paul Fromm also posted: | Quote: | The Police Raid on Jessy & Der Totenkopf -- In Their Own Words
July 27, 2006
Things that were taken from the Donnelly/ Beaumont residence by the RCMP and the Hate Crime Team
…..
• Data CD’s (personal files, resumes, Canadian Human Rights Commission data [our defense was on a few of them labeled “CHRC data”] family photos) Over 20 + (twenty plus) taken.
• 2 (two) computer towers (one[one] was Ciaran’s mothers and one[one] was Jessica’s fathers)
source< source
|
Jessica reviewed the posting about an hour later and posted a Thank You post. If one looks at the missing items post above, there are brackets around the CDs relating to Jessica's defense. This was obviously imporatnat enough for Jessica to emphasize.
So what does “ left for the CHRC mean”? Left where ? From Jessica’s inventory count, it wasn’t left at her home for the CHRC to come by and pick up at a later date. It was gone, along with her computers and other items. Who at the CHRC was designated to receive this information? How was this arranged ? When was this pre-determined? How would the police know enough to seize legal defense files for the CHRC ? Remember, according to Goldberg's testimony, there are no formal or informal arrangements or agreements with any police force. Wink, wink.
From Jessica’s notes and disclosures, we see the trail of evidence. It is no wonder that the proponents of the CHRC modus operandi would paint any website carrying such evidence as neo-Nazi sites. How else would one discredit that evidence. How else would one discourage a reader from researching and verifying? How else does one combat the truth? Try it and find out. Get a swastika pasted on your forehead for your troubles. No charge. Yet.
We can now see the trail of how Jessica’s computer was seized by the RCMP. We can see that Jessica’s legal defense files were passed on to the CHRC. Do we know whether the CHRC investigation opened up these files and read them? What do you think ? We can now see through the transcripts, that the CHRC obtained pictures of Jessica and her boyfriend Donnelly. We can also read that these pictures were in some sort of email system. If the CHRC accessed Jessica’s email system to obtain these pictures, and further printed them out to use as evidence against her, is there any real question of the CHRC popping open Jessica’s legal defense files ? Just to have a look, mind you. Just to look for more hate speech. Just to verify that the CHRC is doing their job; turning over every rock and stone, even if they are someone’s defense files. When I have turned over rocks and stones, I have usually found creepy crawlies.
Now talk about a game plan! No lawyer present for the defendant. No legal aid available. A ten day notice of trial. Hearsay presented against you. Strange evidence appearing. No witnesses for the defendant allowed. No defense at all. A new cliché in the fight against Freedom of Speech could well be “ The best offense is to take the respondent’s defense ”. Anything you may want to say in your own defense, we already know. We had a copy of it ahead of time. Why bother with the trivialities of law, evidence, justice and fair play outlined by Member Dr. Groarke, when you can launch new tools like this? A break-through in investigative techniques.
Why even bother with the hearing ? There’s a pre-approved mortgage on your future. You will be informed of how you will make payments when you get to the Star Chamber.
Without the ability to speak aloud, there are no other freedoms, for they too have been mortgaged by our silence.
"It matters not how a man dies, but how he lives."
– Samuel Johnson
.
_________________
Freedom really does not evolve, it revolts.
Today`s rebel is a conservative and fiscal responsibility has become the new counterculture! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sponsor
|
Use PayPal to make regular monthly $20 donations to the free speech cause - quit any time! Or make a one time donation!
|
 |
 Peter O'Donnell
Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Total posts: 7995 Location: BC Age: 60 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 04/ 18/ 08 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fourhorses, what would you say is the total cost (besides the political damage) to our country in this ongoing investigation of Jessica, the shopgirl with a mind of her own?
And what would you say is her worst alleged thought crime?
I'm guessing you'll say ten million bucks and she doesn't like immigrants.
If they went after everyone in B.C. who thinks like Jessica (probably a majority) then they would need to spend twenty trillion dollars, and all they would get out of it, would be a large warehouse full of computers, knitting and red laces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fourhorses
|
| Posted: 04/ 18/ 08 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter O'Donnell wrote: | Fourhorses, what would you say is the total cost (besides the political damage) to our country in this ongoing investigation of Jessica, the shopgirl with a mind of her own?
And what would you say is her worst alleged thought crime?
I'm guessing you'll say ten million bucks and she doesn't like immigrants.
|
Give up posting and go into mind reading.
Incidently, where Jessica was hit the hardest financially, was libel, not the actual hate postings. She was ordered to pay $1,500 to the Star Chamber (to me the Star Chamber is not an arm's length from the CHRC).
She was ordered to pay Warman $3,000. A BIG part of that decision was hinged on her Church of the Dead Warman Society. The Chamber, in essence, ruled on libel. It's woven in there. Read the decision by Hadjis.
.
_________________
Freedom really does not evolve, it revolts.
Today`s rebel is a conservative and fiscal responsibility has become the new counterculture! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Edward Kennedy
Joined: 14 Apr 2005 Total posts: 11866 Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 04/ 18/ 08 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think of one word when I read such things, fascism. Add to that denial of constitutional rights and harassment, discriminatory treatment, and cowardice.
The RCMP sure know how to make themselves enemies of the people.
_________________
Please let me know if I said something that offended you. I may want to offend you again sometime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
 backhoe
Joined: 20 Jan 2001 Total posts: 13328 Location: Angel of the 7th Station Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 04/ 19/ 08 3:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Edward Kennedy wrote: | I think of one word when I read such things, fascism. Add to that denial of constitutional rights and harassment, discriminatory treatment, and cowardice.
The RCMP sure know how to make themselves enemies of the people. |
Totalitarians are all the same-
first, they disarm you,
then, they silence you, then...
it's off to the "re-education" camps... or, the Concentration Camps, or the Gulags...
Remember, in order for your society to be "the People's Paradise,"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/665733/posts
Fidel Castro - Cuba
no dissent can be allowed...
_________________
All Across America, the Lights are being relit again... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter O'Donnell
Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Total posts: 7995 Location: BC Age: 60 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 04/ 19/ 08 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
So they spent ten million bucks to steal a month's salary from this kid.
That's really heartwarman. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pauly Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Total posts: 61 Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 04/ 19/ 08 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Edward Kennedy wrote: | I think of one word when I read such things, fascism. Add to that denial of constitutional rights and harassment, discriminatory treatment, and cowardice.
The RCMP sure know how to make themselves enemies of the people. |
Actually since fascists, by definition, are hyper patriotic and xenophobic, which is entirely the opposite of the reasoning shown.
This isn't fascism, but communism would be a better descriptionwith it's treatment of people depending on their class not their geographical origin.
If you ever want to make a Lefties head explode ask them to explain what they mean by "fascist". It's almost as entertaining as getting into religous discussions as a Catholic and asking a well if you're a Protestant what are you protesting against? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter O'Donnell
Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Total posts: 7995 Location: BC Age: 60 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 04/ 19/ 08 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think this new strain of totalitarian thinking has some roots in both Marxist and fascist soil. This is why we are seeing such a variety of responses to it from conservatives, and really, all of them are partly right. The bottom line is, we are dealing with an unhealthy departure from due process in the legal system, and whatever words you want to use to describe that, it needs to be corrected because due process is what makes us truly free. However, there can also be bad laws from which due process can flow, and that's another layer of this particular problem.
The only solution to all of this is a return to basic Canadian responsible government based on the time honoured traditions of British common law. What we have now is some sort of creeping blend of many different bad examples of irresponsible government where special interests can call the shots from behind a smokescreen of contrived laws and outright abuse of position.
The one positive thing about it is that we could get to see the results of ultra-leftist and Islamic radicals locking horns in some ultimate battle for the final spoils, and that should be a treat, because at least one of them has to lose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Edward Kennedy
Joined: 14 Apr 2005 Total posts: 11866 Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 04/ 19/ 08 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter O'Donnell wrote: | I think this new strain of totalitarian thinking has some roots in both Marxist and fascist soil. This is why we are seeing such a variety of responses to it from conservatives, and really, all of them are partly right. The bottom line is, we are dealing with an unhealthy departure from due process in the legal system, and whatever words you want to use to describe that, it needs to be corrected because due process is what makes us truly free. However, there can also be bad laws from which due process can flow, and that's another layer of this particular problem.
The only solution to all of this is a return to basic Canadian responsible government based on the time honoured traditions of British common law. What we have now is some sort of creeping blend of many different bad examples of irresponsible government where special interests can call the shots from behind a smokescreen of contrived laws and outright abuse of position.
The one positive thing about it is that we could get to see the results of ultra-leftist and Islamic radicals locking horns in some ultimate battle for the final spoils, and that should be a treat, because at least one of them has to lose. |
Who would one side with? They are both tyrannical and oppressive. They are both religions that are anethema to Christianity. They are both intolerant of any other belief system. At least muslims are not cowards like lieberals.
How could one side with two wrongs?
_________________
Please let me know if I said something that offended you. I may want to offend you again sometime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| (CHRC files) Jessica Beaumont - The Best Offense: Wink wink. |
|
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
