Ron Gray delves into the possible (probable?) motives of why the Supreme Court of Canada went out of its way to defame Kari Simpson and deny her right to a re-trial after changing the law in their decision in order to rule against her. Presented in this episode is more archival proof of why the judicial system has felt threatened by Simpson's long and public opposition of judicial corruption.
Ron Gray reviews the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in the matter of WIC vs. Simpson. Included is the actual recording of Kari Simpson's rally speech that Rafe Mair likened to Hitler and the KKK. Also, to illustrate how Justice Ian Binnie and Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin compounded Rafe Mair's defamation by repeating his lies as so-called facts, this episode has several historical video clips of how Kari Simpson actually stood up for the civil rights of gays, lesbians, and all Canadians.
The Honourable Judith Collins, New Zealand’s Justice Minister (AKA “Crusher Collins”), blazed onto the RoadKill Radio highway when she very publicly and brazenly outed former Supreme Court of Canada Justice Ian Binnie for a judicially flawed report. Unlike Canadian wimpy politicians, lawyer-cum-Justice Minister cried legal foul after paying Binnie a reported $400K to review an alleged wrongful conviction in one of New Zealand’s most controversial murder cases. The Minister didn’t mince words in her media release about the calibre of Binnie’s report. She bluntly and matter-of-factly stated:
“My concerns are broadly that the report appeared to contain assumptions based on incorrect facts, and showed a misunderstanding of New Zealand law. It lacked a robustness of reasoning used to justify its conclusions.”
Bravo to an Minister Collins, an elected official who is willing expose judges whose robes are tattered and shredded by wrong-doing! All RKR wants for Christmas is a Justice Minister with the same ballsy equipment – horse power – as New Zealand’s!
RoadKill Radio News: Mr. Justice Ian Binnie, the former Supreme Court of Canada judge who wrote the controversial decision in the landmark defamation case of WIC Radio Ltd. v. Simpson, is now facing the same charges of flawed reasoning, assumed facts, and lack of legal knowledge in a New Zealand case.
Last year, retired SCC Justice Binnie was paid nearly NZ$414,000 (about C$345,000) to review a demand for compensation by a New Zealand man whose conviction of murdering his parents and three siblings was overturned after 13 years.
In his review, Judge Binnie recommended compensation, reportedly as high as NZ$2 million (C$1.67 million), a review that New Zealand Justice Minister Judith Collins characterized as containing “… assumptions based on incorrect facts.” Collins said the review “… lacked a robustness of reasoning … to justify its conclusions.”
Kari Simpson, one of the litigants in the controversial case that went before the Supreme Court of Canada, wasn’t surprised by the public outing of now retired Justice Binnie by New Zealand Justice Minister Judith Collins. Simpson wrote earlier today to Minister Collins to inform her that Justice Binnie has previous engaged in similar judicial deficiencies that include writing a decision that is “fraught with unsupported findings of fact, lies treated as facts, manufactured evidence.
Simpson said, “… the New Zealand government has experienced exactly the same corruption of the rule of law as I’ve pointed out to our Prime Minister, the Justice Minister and the Canadian Judicial Council, and how this sort of misconduct brings the judicial system into disrepute. This scandal bolsters the merits of my complaint.”
Simpson continued, “Perhaps if the Prime Minister, Justice Minister and the Canadian Judicial Council had acted on the red flags I raised, New Zealand could have saved itself nearly half a million dollars.”
A formal complaint naming Justice Binnie et al by Kari Simpson to the Canadian Judicial Council is pending
-30-
(Photo of Retired SCC Justice Ian Binnie by Paul Mayne, Western News)
A former Supreme Court of Canada judge is in hot water in New Zealand over what the Justice Minister there calls “a flawed report”.
It’s the same judge who, while sitting on the Canadian Supreme Court bench, wrote the decision in Kari Simpson’s defamation lawsuit—the scandalous case that forms the basis of RoadKill Radio’s Drive for Justice Internet webcast series.
In the Canadian trial, Mr. Justice Ian Binnie accepted as “fact” statements that were provably false, and for which no evidence was presented to the court. Further, the high court decision repeated those lies as though they were true, thus further slandering Mrs. Simpson.
Last year, retired Supreme Court of Canada Justice Ian Binnie was paid nearly NZ$414,000 (about C$345,000) to review a demand for compensation by a New Zealand man who had served 13 years in jail after being convicted of murdering five members of his own family—his parents and three siblings. His conviction was later overturned.
In his review, Judge Binnie recommended compensation. State broadcaster TVNZ reported that David Bain could be in line for a payout of up to NZ$2 million (C$1.67 million).
But the New Zealand Justice Minister, Judith Collins, sent the Binnie Report to a New Zealand QC for “peer review”; that review found that Judge Binnie had “exceeded his mandate”, and that:
• “…the principles to be applied to an inquiry of this kind… have been misunderstood in the Binnie Report; and … in consequence it would be unsafe to act upon the Binnie Report.”
• “Those errors have been compounded by the publicity given to … matters which ought to have been for Cabinet alone… “
• “Binnie J made fundamental errors of principle.”
• “The correct principles should now be applied to the evidence afresh.”
• “Binnie J criticised named individuals without giving them adequate opportunity to respond…” and
• the Binnie Report is vulnerable to judicial review.”
“…the report appeared to contain assumptions based on incorrect facts,” Collins said in a Dec. 11 press release, “It lacked a robustness of reasoning … to justify its conclusions.”
In a statement e-mailed to the magazine Canadian Lawyer, Judge Binnie, who is currently in Switzerland, called Collins’ news release a “political document.”
But Collins says she had raised concerns about Binnie’s report when she met with the former judge in September, and told him it would be peer reviewed.
“I also advised Justice Binnie the report must remain confidential, and it would be premature to release it until after Cabinet had made a decision on Mr. Bain’s claim,” she wrote in her statement.
“Since then, I have received from Justice Binnie, unsolicited, two further versions of his report.”
Interviewed at her office in Langley, BC, Kari Simpson said, “I’m happy to learn that the New Zealand government has experienced exactly the same corruption of the rule of law as I’ve pointed out to our Prime Minister, the Justice Minister and the Canadian Judicial Council, and how this sort of misconduct brings the judicial system into disrepute. This scandal bolsters the merits of my complaint.”
“This goes far beyond either David Bains’ case or mine,” she continued. “This reveals how the legal fraternity covers for its own, and yet another example of why the so-called ‘justice system’ in Canada urgently needs a public inquiry.
“Perhaps if the Prime Minister, Justice Minister and the CJC had acted on the red flags I raised, New Zealand could have saved itself nearly half a million dollars.”
Simpson has sent a letter to NZ Justice Minister Judith Collins, pointing out that “while on the bench of the Supreme Court of Canada, Mr. Justice Binnie wrote a decision that is fraught with unsupported findings of fact, lies treated as ‘facts’, manufactured evidence and… contextual chicanery.”
Click here to read Kari Simpson’s full correspondence to the NZ Justice Minister.
(Photo of Retired SCC Justice Ian Binnie by Paul Mayne, Western News)
Dr. Salim Mansur, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Western Ontario, shows how the doctrine of official multiculturalism has produced hypocrisy in Canada’s Supreme Court and Criminal Code, and at the UN.
“Liberalism”, he tells Ron Gray, no longer means what philosophers like John Locke wrote of: the goal of liberty for individuals; it has been corrupted by multiculturalism into group equality—and some groups are wildly illiberal.
Ron Gray takes us through the process of appealing a court decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. Citing historic and literary sources and case law, we learn how Canada's Supreme Court cherry picks the cases it will hear. In the case of Rafe Mair's proven defamation of Kari Simpson, we learn how Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin's ideology and warped perception of the Supreme Court's role in Canadian lawmaking made this particular case very tasty indeed.
Let me begin by asserting that Canada has a strong and healthy justice system. Indeed, our courts and justice system are looked to by many countries as exemplary. We have well-appointed courtrooms, presided over by highly qualified judges. Our judges are independent and deliver impartial justice, free of fear and favour. The Canadian Judicial Council, which I head, recently issued an information note on the judicial appointments process in which it affirmed these long-standing principles on which our justice system is based. Canadians can have confidence that judges are committed to rendering judgment in accordance with the law and based on the evidence. Corruption and partisanship are non-issues. In all these things, we are fortunate indeed.
Remarks of the Right Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C. Presented at the Empire Club of Canada Toronto, March 8, 2007 (The Challenge We Face).
Good Day Readers:
Since that statement was made there’s the Douglas Inquiry and the shocking allegations concerning the conduct of British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Mary Marvyn Koenigsberg (federally appointed) in Simpson versus Mair & WIC the subject of a series of videos on www.DriveForJustice.com. There is also the case of a third federally appointed Justice CyberSmokeBlog is unable to discuss.
… We have well-appointed courtrooms …
Don’t think so! What good are they if the public is unable to hear Justices, counsel and witnesses half the time? Such is the case in Manitoba Queen’s Bench and the Federal Court of Canada in Winnipeg.
During the Douglas Inquiry on more than one occasion the audio system broke down leaving lawyers scrambling to try to fix it. At times it functioned like that one would expect to find in a third world country. Was any thought given to having an audio expert available in the event of such a contingency? Of course not! Witnesses and even counsel had to be constantly reminded by Chair Alberta Chief Justice Catherine Fraser to speak louder or sit/stand closer to their desk microphones because lapel microphones where not being used.
A veteran Toronto reporter at the Douglas Inquiry who has covered many, many Federal Court proceedings there noted it was deja vu all over again.
It has been said when you send a letter to the Supreme Court of Canada it disappears into a big, black hole never to be seen or heard from again.
That has been CSB’s experence on three previous occasions the most recent of which is reprinted below.
The Right Honourable Chief Justice of Canada
Beverley McLachlin, P.C.
Supreme Court of Canada
301 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0J1
Dear Chief Justice McLachlin:
The assumption is made you were accurately quoted.
We would like to offer our views regarding The Globe and Mail article based on The Manitoba Law Courts where our experience lies. There is no reason to believe it is any better or worse here than in other jurisdictions throughout Canada. In fact, it’s likely a poster child or microcosm of what ails courts across the country.
1.0 Barriers To Legal System Must Be Lowered If Public Confidence Is To Be Maintained
Barriers to entry can take many forms. Why cannot standard legal documents such as Statements of Claim/Defence, Affidavits, Motions, Motion Briefs, to name but a few, not be registered, filed and expensed online? Is the technology not already in place? What economic impact does this have on litigants who are in a different Canadian jurisdiction much less outside the country?
Why are Daily Dockets not displayed electronically?
2.0 Not Enough Judges, Lawyers Are Expensive
If there are not enough judges whose fault? Surely, in any jurisdiction there must be qualified candidates lined up to share in the salary, pension, benefits and other perquisites of a judicial appointment.
In the past, you are on the public record as urging the legal profession to undertake more pro bono work as one way to increase public availability to the courts. Is there not another. Many litigants are well-educated. How many lawyers are prepared to allow them to draft as many of the legal documents required as possible, of course, subject to their final approval?
3.0 Action Committee On Access To Justice In Civil And Family Matters
Our preliminary research based on discussions with litigants here, as well as reading about problems with Family Court in the United States, Australia and just about anywhere else one chooses to turn, is they’re in a mess. In short, a major re-think of the current business model is required .
We have not examined closely the aforementioned Committee but does it at least have some layperson direct involvement/input or, as so often happens, it is the legal system examining and passing judgment on itself in the absence of any citizen/taxpayer oversight? For example, what provision exists for men/women who have been through a divorce or child custody case to outline their experiences firsthand?
4.0 No One Will Solve This Alone
The “silver bullet” referenced in your comments could well turn out to be those citizens and taxpayers who must suffer through the inefficiencies a system that is in dire need of re-shaping. Who better to ask than the users who, in the end, are obliged to pay the cost.
5.0 Courts Have To Be Adequately Staffed
As previously noted, that is but half the equation the other being technology. The Supreme Court of the State of Indiana is about to embark on a year long pilot project that would see automated cameras and recording equipment replace the traditional court clerk in several courtrooms. Any jurisdiction anywhere in Canada experimenting with anything evenly remotely similar? Probably not.
6.0 Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada
In the case of RCMP Officer Monty Robinson, it should be noted a petition to the Supreme Court of Canada is no guarantee of a Hearing. It decides not you.
Finally, Chief Justice McLachlin if there is one change you could make that would be everlasting it would be to do what you can to improve the audio in courtrooms. Time and time and time and … again we have attended Queen’s Bench and Provincial Court Hearings where it is impossible, even sitting in the front row, to often hear Justices/Judges, much less lawyers and witnesses.
We were reminded yet again at the recent Douglas Inquiry where the Committee had to constantly remind Counsel and witnesses to speak louder – that is, when the audio equipment was not malfunctioning which, to date, has occurred several times. And how many millions of dollars will it cost before it has concluded?
Canadians like to pride themselves on having an open court system but is it really if the public gallery cannot hear half the time? If you can bring about the use of lapel microphones by Justices/Judges, lawyers and witnesses, you will have solved a seemingly simple but to date impossible problem.
And for that you will get our vote as the greatest Chief Justice in the annals of the Canadian judiciary.
Respectfully,
Clare L. Pieuk
Media Citizen Journalist
Blog Master
www.CyberSmokeBlog.blogspot.com
pieuk@Shaw.ca
Ron Gray takes us into the original Supreme Court of British Columbia trial in which Kari Simpson's lawsuit against shock jock Rafe Mair and his radio station was heard by Justice Mary Marvyn Koenigsberg who – unbeknownst to Simpson at the time – was embroiled in her own anti-defamation lawsuit. You'll hear the arguments made in defence of Rafe Mair's outlandish lies and slanders against an innocent defender of family rights, and hear why "Justice" Koenigsberg might be inclined to look the other way.
Daily at 7:30 pm Eastern
Monday, November 5, 2012
Drive for Justice 20: The Trial Begins
Ron Gray takes us into the original Supreme Court of British Columbia trial in which Kari Simpson‘s lawsuit against shock jock Rafe Mair and his radio station was heard by Justice Mary Marvyn Koenigsberg who – unbeknownst to Simpson at the time – was embroiled in her own anti-defamation lawsuit. You’ll hear the arguments made in defence of Rafe Mair’s outlandish lies and slanders against a fierce defender of family rights, and hear why “Justice” Koenigsberg might be inclined to tip the scales of justice.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
RoadKillRadio News: Creating Bullies – Are Children Raised Better by Their Parents or by Institutions?
Kari Simpson and Ron Gray speak with Helen Ward, President of Kids First Parent Association of Canada, about the assertion by anti-parent activists that government institutions would actually raise your children better than you do. The theory – already debunked by countless studies – is that peers and autocrats have a better influence on a child’s upbringing than good old fashioned parental care and guidance. The real shocker: Such theories are being promoted by teachers and their unions!
Thursday, November 8, 2012
The Mark Hasiuk Show: The BC Housing Scandals
Mark Hasiuk recently broke the story of widespread abuse of Purchasing Cards – company debit cards – issued to hundreds of BC Housing employees and used to run up unchecked expenses with taxpayer money. This scandal is right on the heels of Mark’s exposé of another British Columbia housing scandal in which tens of millions of taxpayer dollars were discovered being funnelled through the BC Housing Management Commission directly to the CEO’s wife’s personal housing program Atira, a program that unapologetically runs de facto brothels in Vancouver’s east side. How is BC Housing Minister Rich Coleman defending these obvious and egregious abuses and conflicts of interest? During his re-election bid, not much, of course.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Family Freedom Fighters: Can a T-Shirt Change the World?
Ron Gray reviews the 2010 banning of a T-shirt designed by convicted Canadian felons to demonstrate their opinion that Canada is in political and social distress – a ban ostensibly based solely on the fact that an upside-down maple leaf is depicted on the T-shirt. Might the resulting class action lawsuit against the Attorney General of Canada actually lead to a revision of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? And would that be such a bad thing?
Join Kari Simpson and Ron Gray as they deliver hot news and cold, hard facts. Learn how Canadian Parliament has skirted the Truth – once again! Why is Rona Ambrose, the Minister of Status for Women, being vilified for defending baby girls? How did Russia’s latest reaffirmation of a Health Risk ban make Ron Gray cheer “Yay, Russia!”? Did the Supreme Court of Canada really rule that sex + a little HIV + condumb is A-OK by them!? And hear an update on the Drive For Justice campaign that has left the Prime Minister – and all of Parliament – speechless!
Ron Gray explores the latest character in the "Drive For Justice" series – one decidedly lacking in character and professionalism. Rafe Mair lied repeatedly about the true facts associated with this unprofessional goof of a teacher while vilifying Kari Simpson for supporting a parent who refused to allow her young son to be indoctrinated with this teacher's version of left-wing propaganda. Instead of telling listeners about Mr. Chamberlain's lies and abuse of his role as a teacher, Rafe Mair falsely accused Kari of supporting the parents simply because this teacher was "gay". Pay attention Rafe Mair! Oh wait! You already know all this, you just choose to continue to lie and shamefully hide behind the skirts of not-so-law-abiding judges.
Join Ron Gray as he introduces us to a few people that shock jock Rafe Mair refers to as Kari Simpson's "Ilk" – those horrible nasty concerned parents who didn't want their children to be lied to or indoctrinated with pro-gay political propaganda while at school. You will also get to meet – via video – "the gay teacher" James Chamberlain, and watch him admit to a national TV audience that he teaches non-approved pro-gay ideology (and other left-wing nonsense) in his kindergarten classroom. Oh wait! Chamberlain later admitted – under oath – that he was lying when he made this televised declaration! What a role model!
Join Ron Gray as he interviews Kari Simpson about the Rafe Mair editorial that sparked the lawsuit that went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. Included are re-enactments of court testimony, and a "CBC Forum" excerpt that clearly exemplifies Rafe Mair's lies.
Monday, August 6, 2012
Drive For Justice: Rafe Mair’s Campaign of Hate Intensifies
Host Ron Gray details Rafe Mair‘s increased frequency of lies and personal attacks on Kari Simpson that led to the landmark Supreme Court showdown regarding defamation. Learn the truth of Rafe Mair‘s lies, and discover why you should never blindly believe what a shock jock with an agenda says about decent public advocates.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
RoadKill Radio News: A Slow Learner Loses Ground While Harassing Others
Kari Simpson and Ron Gray follow up on the story of a convicted homosexual sex offender using the courts and personal intimidation to cover up the very public truth about his crimes. The young man in question is a convicted felon who spends much of his time harassing people who are only carrying his own message to the masses, a message he published to protect youth from older predators. He now attempts to censor the truth by threatening video hosts like our own favourite, Vimeo.com. A very bizarre case.
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Drive For Justice’s First Memo to Bevy
In a media release, the Drive For Justice campaign for judicial accountability presents its first “Memo to Bevy”! This week’s memo is a special invitation to Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Beverly McLaghlin and Canadians to join our special judicial road trip, an important Canadian journey called the Drive For Justice. Reserve your seat now; you won’t want to miss any scandal or spectacle! Promised sightings include: judges who lie, judges who obstruct justice, tainted courtrooms… Oh my!
Thursday, August 9, 2012
The Mark Hasiuk Show: Dave Diewert Discusses Vancouver’s East Side
Mark Hasiuk hosts Dave Diewert, Sessional Lecturer at Regent College, in a spirited discussion about Vancouver’s East Side. Topics include wasted government resources, questionable public housing, crime enablement, and the perpetuation of the poor.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Culture Guard: Fighting Judicial Corruption, Pt. 3 of 3 – Petition to Repair Our Courts
In the last of a three-part interview, Kari Simpson speaks with Christopher Taucar, a respected Ontario lawyer who is conducting his own war against judicial corruption. Mr. Taucar presents two petitions to voice your support for judicial accountability.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Family Freedom Fighters: The Pain in Spain is Easy to Explain; plus, a Wall St. Journal Warning
This week Ron Gray presents two commentaries about world economics. First, he puts the current European economic crisis in perspective, and then refers to a Wall Street Journal warning that finally recognizes the root of the problem.