THE CONTEMPTIBLE SHAME OF OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Money can buy you an acquittal and it is used by the Crown to convict. The party without it is at a huge disadvantage even if the Crown have a weak case. Just look at the numbers of citizens both in the U.S. and Canada who are exonerated after being convicted of serious crimes and sentenced to decades in jail. Two groups of lawyers come to mind namely Innocence Canada and the Association for the Wrongfully Convicted. Both groups have freed many wrongfully convicted citizens and have long waiting lists for their services.

Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carried the following story titled " Murder case highlights how money can be a key to defence". It is about the Dennis Oland murder case in New Brunswick and is the poster child for monied defendants receiving much different outcomes from our judicial system. Nicole O'Byrne, a law professor at the University of New Brunswick said that Mr. Oland "had the resources to pay a defence team to follow up on every aspect of the case by hiring experts and by taking portions of the case to the Supreme Court of Canada for determination." She further added that "...not all citizens have equal access to resources that may be needed to mount a successful defence".

Kirk Makin, co-president of Innocence Canada stated that "...many of the people wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated are poor people who can't afford the best defence." He added "Dennis Oland is a very fortunate man. The difference is profound between someone who has the means to get the best defence and pursue every avenue of appeal vigorously. The vast majority of people don't."

Mr. Makin also stated that people with top lawyers are treated differently by the courts (i.e. by judges). "When a top lawyer such as an Eddie Greenspan walks into court they are taken very seriously. There's a deference that's shown to them because of their reputation and skill". I interpret that as meaning that their words are given more weight by judges and juries.

Poor people are usually convicted. Rich people often aren't. Whatever happened to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Whatever happened to being judged upon the evidence presented? I've been there and an asshole judge with a bias or a personal animosity or who is simply incompetent can make a mockery of our entire judicial system. And the judicial system let them get away with it forever. Shame on the pack of them and the political apparatus that doesn't care.

WSIB AND OTHER GOVERNMENT SCAMS

Today's Waterloo Region Record has a Letter To The Editor written by Robert and Dale DeMatteo, two Occupational health researchers from Campbellcroft, Ontario. The title at the beginning of the Letter is "Why workers are demanding a public inquiry into WSIB." They have read numerous denial of claim decisions from the Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB) in regards to General Electric cases in Peterborough, Ontario. These two researchers refer to the WSIB as using "science" as a weapon against injured workers. And thus has it always been. The WSIB and its forerunner the Workmans Compensation Board (WCB) were set up essentially to allow employers to save money and increase their profits on the backs of their workers. Sometimes literally. With workers being refused access to the courts for proper compensation after being injured on the job, the financial burden was transferred from private employers to the public purse. As it always has been whenever possible. It's called externalizing of costs and the most obvious example is companies transferring their waste disposal costs onto the public via dumping into the common air and common waterways.

This Letter To The Editor makes clear that the Board have long used standards and criteria not enshrined in law. They have demanded evidence and "proof" of the cause of injury far in excess of that which the Act demands. In other words the Board has and continues to weed out claimants from just compensation. Hence workers who had zero say in the original formation of the two compensation boards removing workers rights to sue have even less say in the management and operation of a compensation system that is biased against them. What I also find disheartening is the arbitrary nature of the WSIB decision process. They appear to deny obvious claims of groups of workers (GE in Peterborough & rubber workers in K-W) in order to save money but allow other individual, questionable claims possibly in order to indicate that they do pay out for some claims. A car insurance company pulling this crap would likely be run out of town as should the Ontario WSIB.

STORMWATER POND OUTLET INTO WOOLWICH RESERVOIR COMPLETED

Well it took them long enough. And our so called public Conservation Authority, the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA), should be ashamed of their public relations. Also they should be ashamed of their lack of transparency in their attempts to hide from accountability. Finally they should be ashamed of their willful abuse of Ontario legislation by hiding behind our Freedom of Information laws in order to avoid answering very simple and straightforward questions from not just one local concerned citizen but from many who had verbally expressed concerns with the lack of a proper outlet from the new storm water pond behind the Floradale Feed Mill that was discharging into the Woolwich Reservoir via overland flow of rainwater and mud.

Yesterday I was again at the scene albeit for the first time in two weeks. Not so much as an update or even an estimated time of construction had been provided to me after I had sent several e-mails to both the MOE (MECP) and the GRCA. They also had refused to provide me a copy of the permit (presumably with drawings included) that would have shown the intended construction of a proper outlet to the reservoir. I had indicated in those e-mails that other users of the trail had expressed serious concerns with the scenario of having the storm water pond built, including gravity flow channel directly to the trail overlooking the perhaps eight foot embankment down to the reservoir. At that point both during the spring rainy season and afterwards the rainwater and mud was either running down the trail (northwards) or over the embankment directly into the Woolwich Reservoir.

Do these bureaucrats actually believe that these are matters of national security? Do they believe that terrorists might somehow learn something that could undermine the stability and security of the Woolwich Dam? Why is it so important to them to keep secret the date of construction of a concrete outlet from a storm water pond into the Woolwich Reservoir? Do they think that responding to open, legitimate information requests from the public somehow weakens their power and authority in all matters pertaining to surface water in the Grand River valley? Or are they perhaps even more scared of increased observation and accountability, not from fellow political travellors, but from the unbiased general public?

Last question: Are they so petty and jealous of their authority that their biggest priority is to avoid the public ever learning that the squeaky wheel gets the grease?

Last comment: I'm not an engineer but the concrete outlet looks impressive and professional. Presumably the felt type material covering the inlet on the east side of the trail is to filter out the mud and sediments accompanying the storm water flow. Also presumably when that felt type covering becomes clogged it will be either cleaned or replaced. The outlet then goes underneath the trail and emerges on the face of the embankment (west side of the trail) above the level of the water in the reservoir whereupon it discharges into the reservoir.

WHAT A DAMNING INDICTMENT OF MALES IN AUTHORITY

Prior to the rest of this post criticizing males in charge of historically male dominated institutions such as the military, RCMP, police, firemen, and even municipal public works departments, let me be very clear. The few women who have managed to advance to positions of authority, whether in these just listed male dominated institutions or even in politics which certainly used to be the sole domain of males; they have not done much either to advance the careers of their female colleagues nor to advance the cause of women in general as being more ethical, caring, or honourable when they are in positions of authority. My observations have been that most of the women who do advance in male dominated institutions do so by mimicking the behaviour of the males around them. This is not a compliment to either gender. They tend to adopt "circle the wagons" and "the blue wall" type of attitudes as well as promoting of the status quo even when doing business as usual has been proven to be counter productive to the credibility, reputation, and integrity of the organization.

Two articles appeared in today's Waterloo Region Record which may illustrate why I believe this to be so. The first is titled "Deal reached in harassment lawsuit against RCMP". The RCMP have been front and centre for many years now for both their alleged and proven unfair and unequal treatment of many women in their ranks. The second article while shocking may be less an indictment of male power and privilege or not as it concerns CSIS, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. I suspect that they too are male dominated in the top leadership positions but I admit I don't know that for a fact. Also the article concerning them titled "Group says spies went too far" is not about their treatment of women in their workplace but about how those in charge have strayed so far from their mandate, whether they admit it or not. This includes allegations by the B.C. Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) that CSIS have spied on Canadian environmental groups as well as upon certain aboriginal groups.

All of this is of course in the light of both historic and ongoing workplace harassment including many years ago of the City of Waterloo Public Works department. I am advised that there has been incredible discrimination against females attempting to do research or teaching at the university level. Apparently universities were very male dominated institution historically although university educated males are at least bright enough to recognize how stupid and unsustainable that behaviour is nowadays and are addressing those wrongs. Again here in Waterloo Region we the residents and citizens have been subjected to the shining of light upon our very own local police force and it has not been pleasant. There is a lawsuit initiated by four former Waterloo Region police officers (3 female, 1 male) that has been attempting to be certified as a class action lawsuit. Of course we the taxpayers are paying legal costs to the WRPS and the civilian board as well as to the Police Association in order to block these legal attempts to redress gender discrimination. That misallocation of taxpayer funds in order to buy legal protection from doing the right and proper things are routinely practiced by police forces, school boards, Mounties, politicians and other non accountable institutions. Another local, former police officer, Kelly Donovan, has also been facing taxpayer funded legal harassment by the Waterloo Region Police Service and their cronies on the civilian police board and in the police association which appears to be firmly in bed with the old boys club.

TAXPAYERS DOLLARS PROTECTING A GUILTY POLICE FORCE

Last April 3 I posted here about statements made by James Bennett, lawyer for the WRPS. Those statements as quoted from the Waterloo Region Record were a frank admission that the facts stated in a class action lawsuit against the police service were essentially correct but that the Ontario Court of Appeal was not the appropriate venue to be discussing/debating them. The allegations by several female police officers as well as one male officer are both shocking, disappointing and miles beneath the level of conduct we should both expect and demand from our regional police force. These allegations have also been substantiated via the public statements and book written by former Waterloo Region Police officer, Kelly Donovan, titled "Systemic Misfeasance in Ontario Policing and the Coordinated Suppression of Whistleblowers."

My blunt and personal opinion, bottom line of the whole sordid history of opening up traditionally male jobs to women is as follows. Our politicians and other members of the power structure decided that they were tired of hearing as to how only large, rough and tough males could possibly be effective police officers. In other words the possible pool of labour capable of handling front line police work was incredibly limited. I would suggest that indeed it is. Not very many men or women are capable of handling the mental and emotional stress and anguish much less the physical efforts occasionally required.

That said the recruiting requirements historically demanded seemed to focus on the physical requirements and much less on all the rest. That was an error. Hiring six foot tall white men, with or without a bad attitude, certainly didn't reflect all of society. By opening up the police force to women, racial minorities, and persons of smaller stature our politicians and authorities pretended that they were being egalitarian. In fact they were simply shifting the physical requirements further down the list and getting in on the leading edge of recognizing women as being mentally and emotionally equal to men. They were also simultaneously by expanding the potential labour force for police officers probably thinking economically that expanding the supply of labour would keep downward pressure on the costs (i.e. wages).

Now here's where it gets nasty. These expanded recruiting scenarios were forced upon both the rank and file officers as well as the senior management. No one on the current police forces, soldiers, firemen etc., who had all been recruited based primarily upon their size and strength, were the least bit amenable to hiring people based on qualifications that many of them did not have. I'm not suggesting that skills like empathy, intelligence, common sense, deescalation techniques, note taking, public speaking, were totally foreign to current police officers etc. but as these officers were not hired for those skills in the first place then it is likely that many current officers did not have them in abundance.

So what is "nasty" about normal human reaction to change that may negatively affect one's future career? Well male politicians themselves were beginning to feel competition from female political candidates and they didn't like it. What was the old boys' club going to do? Easy! While the politicians would order integration of both genders they would privately assure the old boys' management that there would be limited to no oversight as to how female candidates were treated or accepted within the rank and file. Yes politicians of both genders would give lip service to proper, decent, normal human behaviour but it was left entirely up to the hugely male dominated senior police management to insist upon fair treatment of women police officers or not, as they chose. Well as the rank and file were dead against women in policing, police management in order to keep the respect and support of the rank and file determined that it was in their best interests to look the other way as much as possible.Very nasty behaviour by male co-workers may leave no visible scars but it certainly would discourage new female recruits from joining and also discourage current ones from staying. Throughout this, male and female politicians have happily looked the other way while continuing to spout platitudes to the public as they have always done.

Kelly Donovan has recently released a report indicating that our Waterloo Region Police Service has spent over $200,000 dollars on legal council in the last two years fighting and harassing her before the courts. This is yet another way to silence women in policing and to discourage further participation by them. Our regional politicians, male and female, are supporting this behaviour. The police, police services board and regional council are abusing both female police officers, past and present, as well as regional taxpayers by continuing to legally harass those who speak out. Taxpayers of both genders do not support these misogynistic attitudes and behaviours. When will our politicians get this through their skulls and act accordingly?