I too am eager to see what happens because on the face of the evidence before the Saint John court, I would say that Charles is innocent of the obstruction charges. There is video evidence from TV that he was not obstructing police as charged. More importantly, had he been able to use the pictures in his digital camera that were deleted by the Saint John Police aka Keystone Kops, he could have easily demonstrated his physical position in the melee that ensued that day, thus absolving him of being in the middle of the kerfuffle and proving that he was documenting it as a blogger.
But there is more to this case than meets the eye - the final paragraph in which the reporter says Charles was banned from the legislature for "Harrasment" : where is the evidence for that? There is no evidence, that's the sticky little problem which keeps raising its ugly head and will come back to bite a few politicians in the proverbial butt I dare say.
The decision to ban Charles from the Legislature was made behind closed doors, by a small group of seven or eight politicians, among them Shawn Graham and Kelly Lamrock whose true democratic colours will soon be on full display when they find themselves firmly esconced in the seats of power.
In a democracy, one of the most fundamental tenets of our justice system is that the accused as the RIGHT TO KNOW what the charges are against him before he can be found guilty. To this day, Charles still doesn't know the SPECIFICS of the "charges" against him. That's because there were no "charges" per se: rather, the decision to boot him out of the legislature was based on an emotional response, a dislike of Charles based on a negative perception and stereotypes about poor people like Charles who get uppity and don't know their place at the bottom of the social dung heap.
Certain high-powered politicians, their supporting bureacrats in government, employees of the legislature and political hacks who make and shape opinion have decided poor people like Charles are a "pain in the butt". Well tough baloney for them. If they can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. As a citizen of a democracy, Charles has the RIGHT to know who complained about him to the committee that had him barred from the Legislature, what the actual substance of the charges were, and the dates and times of the so-called harrasment incidents so he can mount a defense instead of being tried and hung without a jury by a secret cabal in Fredericton!!!
I'm looking forward to Saint John!!! As the judge said "This is going to be interesting...."
5 comments:
Keystone Kops implies incompetence. They are more likely corrupt. A Keytstone Kop would have left the photos on the camera to be used as evidence.
Did your lawyer not tell you that you should not discuss your case on your blog? And here you go again. How do we know that you were not warned by the staff at the legislature. You yourself knew that they were going to ban you because there were objections to your behaviour. It is obvious from that that you were given warnings and you ignored them.
You were obstructing day-to-day work of the legislature by ambushing politicians, staff and visitors. You will jump in front when a politician was giving an interview to media. You would not abide by rules and not properly sign the book to enter the legislature. When Commissionaire agreed to sign the book on your behalf, you misbehaved and objected to that too. On and on it goes. Let us face it, you did cause lot of obstruction.
Like the ban, the above poster should PROVE those accusations which we know to be groundless.
I'm learning more about the ban in this blog.
Sounds like some employee from the Legislature.
The signature part is very interesting....hmmmm....I'll blog that one later.
Do you want us to stay Tuned as you always say ??
Post a Comment