Kari Simpson hosts part 2 of her interview with Professor Gary Mauser, who defends North America;s gun culture with intelligence and common sense. Learn how gun ownership actually leads to lower crime, fewer shootings, and a respect for this much maligned tool.
Kari Simpson interviews Bill Whatcott in this 4th and final instalment this series. Bill describes his profession as a nurse and how that led to his awareness of left-wing bias in all things Canadian. Nursing also opened Bill's eyes to the horrors of abortion, the ravages of AIDS, and the dearth of spirituality in today's society. Speaking the truth became a no-brainer for Bill Whatcott – and a terrible offence to those who worship hedonism, censorship, and political correctness.
Kari Simpson interviews Professor Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser University about gun legislation, responsible firearm practices, and the statistical truths that gun-phobe Piers Morgan just can't seem to grasp. Professor Mauser and Kari relate their personal experiences with guns, and review the politics of gun control, as well as the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of gun control laws, and the effectiveness (no lack here!) of guns in self defense. Watch for part 2 of this interview, coming soon.
Kari Simson has the great pleasure to interview Bill Whatcott once again in this 4-part series. This time, Bill describes his early years of campaigning against abortion and for the reform and health of homosexuals, and how those activities led to his fight for free speech. Also on tap (and on the phone) is journalist Neil McKinnon, who is editing the upcoming Bill Whatcott autobiography. Neil witnessed Bill's flyer crusade first hand and gives us some illuminating insight into Canada's undaunted warrior for free speech. (Watch for a cameo by RKR office mascot Mugsie!)
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.
Join Kari Simpson in this second installment of a four-part interview with the fascinating Bill Whatcott, Canada's champion of truth and free speech. Hear Bill describe how and where he found religion – or how it found him – and how he learned a simple truth that proved abortion is wrong.
[Photo by Parrot of Doom]
Join Kari Simpson in this first of a 4-part interview with Canada's Champion of Free Speech, Bill Whatcott. In Part 1, Bill recounts his early years as a reckless – and admittedly inept – criminal and drug user. Hear how Canada's institutionalized child-rearing only adds to the problems of troubled youth, offering no parental guidance, no incentive to reform, and no spiritual support. Enabling is never the answer.
Ron Gray hosts – and weighs in – on this lively debate between activists Bill Whatcott and Kari Simpson. Among the topics too hot to be discussed by politicians or the lamestream media are the sanctity of marriage, the erosion of free speech, judicial accountability, gun control, public schools as political indoctrination centres, should sodomy be re-criminalized, and is abortion murder? This chat is fast, fun, and full of fascinating facts and ideas. Tune in and get fired up!
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.
Kari Simpson and Ron Gray speak again with Brian Camenker, head of MassResistance.org. Topics covered today include sex activists and their tactics, society's irrational fear of addressing homosexual issues in a realistic manner ("homorealityphobia"?), legislating against volunteer reparative therapy, the insanity of political correctness, the tide turning against sex activism, a further danger of so-called "bathroom bill" laws, and how transgender laws hurt transgenders.
Kari Simpson and Ron Gray speak with Lucy Sharratt, coordinator for the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN.ca), about their efforts to expose the truth about foods made with Genetically Modified Organisms. Has the public has become unwitting guinea pigs of giant chemical companies and paid-off government officials who are genetically altering our food supply without telling us? Is the motivation of Profit blinding them to the potential casualties of their experiments?
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.
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)
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.
Kari Simpson and Ron Gray speak with John Carpay, founder and president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. John co-authored the Campus Freedom Index, ranking Canadian universities and student unions on how well they carry out their mission of serving as a forum for free speech and open, honest debate. In Mr. Carpay's sights at the moment is BC's Kwantlen Polytechnic University, whose student association is denying club status to Oliver Capko's on-campus pro-life group. Tune in to find out who else gets a Failing grade!