Double Bubble Zones? Eric Scheidler, Executive Director of the Pro-Live Action League, joins Kari Simpson for a fast-paced, informative look into the Pro-Life movement in the United States and the important case of McCullen v. Coakley that is now being considered by the Supreme Court.
For more information, visit prolifeaction.org/about/staff.php#eric
LANGLEY, BC, December 20, 2012 — RoadKill Radio host and noted citizens’ rights advocate Kari Simpson has laid down the gauntlet before the Canadian Judicial Council, a publicly-financed body formed under the Judges Act, which is supposed to protect public confidence in Canada’s judiciary by monitoring the conduct of judges and investigating complaints about federally-appointed judges.
On August 24 of this year, Simpson wrote to the CJC in an attempt to clarify their previous, if any, involvement of matters related to complaints about Justice Marvyn Koenigsberg of the BC Supreme Court. Justice Koenigsberg was Simpson’s controversial trial judge in a case that forms part of a pending complaint by Simpson to the CJC. Simpson did not receive any response.
Simpson then wrote to Chief Justice McLachlin as CJC Chairperson on October 6, 2012, requesting answers to her simple query. No response was forthcoming.
On November 26, 2012 she sent another correspondence to the CJC asking Norman Sabourin, Executive Director of the CJC, to answer the crucial questions related to the CJC’s possible bias. Simpson sought to determine whether or not the CJC had previous involvement in investigating or reviewing information about Justice Koenigsberg. Due to the serious nature of her pending complaint—as it not only captured Koenigsberg J but also members of the Supreme Court of Canada—Simpson also proposed a remedy to the bias problem if it existed: a joint request to the Justice Minister for a Parliamentary inquiry
The CJC finally replied to Simpson on November 26, 2012, but failed to answer the simple questions she had posed. Instead, Norman Sabourin, Executive Director for the CJC, made a bizarre finding that the letter of inquiry was an “abuse of the complaints process” and as such, stated that he was refusing to open a file.
The problem is that Simpson’s letter had specifically stated that the information contained therein was not to be considered as a complaint, and she did not request a file to be opened.
“The response I received from Mr. Sabourin confirms reports that the CJC fears public scrutiny and the public criticisms are justified,” says Simpson. “They’re not accountable to anyone. The legal scheme by which they operate works more like a scam.”
Sabourin refers to Simpson’s claims that Koenigsberg J and Chief Justice McLachlin et al are liars and judicial cheats as “having no foundation,” despite being provided with the facts. Simpson, undeterred, responded today. She pointedly confronts the CJC with challenges that have serious legal implications for the Chief Justice and other named judges, if true.
Simpson ups-the-ante and directs Sabourin to personally advise the judges of her very “public” statements.
Simpson also informs Sabourin of her intent to file a Judicial Review of any determination that results in dismissal by the CJC of her impending complaint. Alternatively, in the circumstance of admitted or perceived bias of the CJC, she advises:
I would be agreeable to pursuing an alternative forum for an independent, objective investigation into my complaint that is agreed upon by all affected parties, such as my previously suggested Parliamentary inquiry.
The CJC has been the target of growing criticism for acting more like a judicial goon—a protectionist gatekeeper—than its touted claims of ensuring judicial accountability.
“Clearly I am not the first to raise the alarm about what is transpiring in the courts,” says Simpson. “The court is broken, injustice abounds and the public’s trust and confidence in our judiciary is compromised. This is not an acceptable situation for our civil democracy. The administration of justice needs to be fixed.”
– 30 –
For more information contact
Kari Simpson
Tel: (604) 514-1614
E-mail: driveforjustice@gmail.com
Full text of Simpson’s Dec. 20, 2012 letter to Norman Sabourin;
Full text of Sabourin’s Nov. 26, 2012 letter to Simpson;
Full text of Simpson’s Oct. 6, 2012 letter to Chief Justice McLachlin here;
Latest Drive For Justice episode #26, Our Ermine Clad Masters Decide;
Summary Brief of events.
EDMONTON, Alberta, 23 November, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Alberta parents who support traditional values are breathing a sigh of relief after the Alberta School Boards Association (ASBA) rejected a proposal calling for policies to deal with an alleged “pervasive school-wide culture of homophobia, transphobia, and heterosexism”.
Sixty-two percent of the boards voted to reject the proposal at the ASBA fall meeting held on Monday.
The motion would have added language specifically singling out gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, and transgender students to an already existing anti-bullying policy.
Jacquie Hansen, president of the Alberta School Boards Association, said that the majority of trustees rejected the policy over concerns that it unnecessarily focused on a certain group of students.
“The feeling in the room was we’d rather have a policy for all kids and that bullying shouldn’t be tolerated no matter who you are or what you have to deal with in your world.”
She called media reaction to the motion’s rejection “unfortunate,” adding that “this is being seen as anti-gay and that’s not what this is about.”
“This is about policy and this is how to best protect our kids,” she said.
Hansen pointed out that trustees had voted earlier in the day to accept a motion that promotes “equality of opportunity, dignity and respect” for all.
Garnett Genuis, Executive Director of Parents for Choice in Education, said that while he supports “efforts to combat bullying of all individuals,” he felt that the motion “did not contain the appropriate safeguards to ensure that faith-based schools and programs would be able to continue to teach their teachings.”
Canada Family Action (CFA), which mobilized opposition to the motion, had stated that the educational bureaucracy’s constant focus on homosexual and other sexual “orientations” was creating division and conflict rather than the “safe schools” environment they envision.
Brian Rushfeldt, CFA’s Executive Director, had stressed that school policies that do not treat all children equal result in “divisive policies which set children up for discrimination.”
He noted that under such policies, children who “do not cater to or agree with homosexual behavior have become targets” for discrimination. “That defeats what education experts say they want to accomplish.
“The real purpose of such LBGT policy is to promote every sexual behavior except normal heterosexual behavior,” he said.
Ron Gray debuts his new show, Family Freedom Fighters, with guest Mary Pichette, Executive Director of Servants Anonymous Society in Surrey, BC. The SAS Surrey program has a successful 10-year record of rescuing hundreds of women from homelessness and sex slavery.
Show #101 Part 1
Taking note of RoadKill Radio’s leadership in exposing the Burnaby School Board’s policy on teaching children that homosexuality is OK—and that the BSB declined to defend its policy on-air—Ted Hewlett, Executive Director of BC Parents and Teachers for Life, noted that the School Board’s contempt for parents parallels the contempt the provincial Ministry of Education has shown for a consortium of six organizations that have asked for the Corren Settlement Agreement to be investigated and overturned. The request, made last July, has not yet had a response from Victoria, Hewlett said.