Crown Clashes With Brad Love Over Parole Ban on Writing to Anyone

Written by Paul Fromm

Friday, 16 March 2012 05:39

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format. If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails. You can read the original version online: http://ymlp288.net/z4ICzY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Crown Clashes With Brad Love Over Parole Ban on Writing to Anyone NEWMARKET, March 13, 2012. It was almost as if she were baiting or mocking him, as Crown Attorney repeatedly asked former political prisoner Brad Love: "Free speech is what this is all about. You think the courts were trying to criminalize your dissent?" Yes," the 53-year old old worker and inveterate letter-writer agreed. Today, Mr. Love finished his evidence in a protracted three-year "breach of probation" trial that has seen him return to Toronto ten times for court appearances and his much interrupted trial before Judge Kelly Wright. At issue was a brutal 2006 parole condition, item "r", in a list of conditions which Mr. Love had to obey. He was forbidden to write to anyone unless they had granted permission to receive his material. In terms of writing, he was rendered gagged non-person. The Crown explained what Judge Hogg was seeking to accomplish in 2006: "The goal was to craft a condition where you would not send these editorial comments unless requested." Mr. Love would frequently send newspaper articles with comments written on them in magic marker. Mr. Love was arrested by eight detectives at an Alternative Forum meeting, March 9, 2009 in Toronto, just after he'd finished a talk, ironically, on free speech. He had sent packages of news articles with his comments to the Canadian Jewish Congress, B'nai Brith, the Jewish Students Union and the York University Students Union in regards to the anti-Israeli apartheid week. In each case, he testified, he called and got permission to send them his views. He'd say: "I saw the article about you guys and I love your radical views. I'd like to send you some of mine. They'd say, 'sure.'" "I'd phone them in regard to whatever news story prompted my interest. My interest piqued their interest," he recalled. "I'd say, "Would it be okay, if I sent you some of my stuff, and they'd say sure.'" Judge Hogg restricted "what I could say," Mr. Love testified. "However, I believe I followed his guidelines Judge Hogg, now retired, had a reputation for being a judicial radical. His order was "overbroad," said Mr. Love's lawyer, Peter Leckie. Mr. Leckie, on re-direct, asked Mr. Love: ":Do you feel you did anything wrong in terms of Judge Hogg's conditions." Mr. Love responded that the groups who complained, only a small number of those who've received his commentaries, "are either over sensitive on this issue or have an ulterior motive." "These groups publicize their beliefs,": he added, "but if they get some material with views they don't agree with, they call the police. I like to question everything that appears before me in my country." In a testy exchange with Mr Love, the Crown said: "It's about your right to exercize freedom of speech. It's a huge part of what drives you as a person." "That what my grandparents fought for in two wars," Mr. Love shot back. "No one should limit my freedom of expredssion. I'm 53 years old and I've seen more than most people," Mr. Love added. "I take freedom of expression to the outer limits," he explained. Earlier, the Crown had acknowledged that Mr. Love, who reads five books a week and is terminally curious, was very intelligent and self-educated. The trial, which could send former political prisoner and letter-writer Love back to prison, concludes tomorrow with final submissions. -- Paul Fromm _____________________________ Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp288.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqgmjugguewwmw Powered by YourMailingListProvider

 

Warman & Canadian Human Rights Commission Still Itching to Send Terry Tremaine to Pri

Written by Paul Fromm

Thursday, 15 March 2012 07:10

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format. If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails. You can read the original version online: http://ymlp278.net/zce5TC -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Warman & Canadian Human Rights Commission Still Itching to Send Terry Tremaine to Prison REGINA. March 13, 2012. Speaking to a meeting of free speech stalwarts in Regina tonight Douglas Christie reported on a recent case management conference call regarding former political prisoner Terry Tremaine. Maitre Poulin, lawyer for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and complainant Richard Warman are pressing for an early sentencing hearing in the hopes of sending the Internet dissident to jail. On two complaints from chronic complainer Richard Warman, Mr. Tremaine faced a contempt of court hearing in Victoria in November, 2010. On November 29, trial judge Sean Harrington acquitted Mr.Tremaine of contempt of court as he had not been served with the court order until the summer of 2009. The federal court order was to enforce the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision of February, 2007 ordering Mr. Tremaine to "cease and desist" from posting on the Internet the same or similar passages that were found by the tribunal as being likely to "expose to hatred or contempt" privileged groups in Canada. Later in 2007, Mr., Tremaine made some further postings that he felt complied with the vague cease and desist order. These became the subject of the contempt of court charge. By the summer of 2009, Daniel Poulin had expanded his interpretation of "cease and desist "to mean taking down of Mr., Tremaine's websitehttp://nspcanada.nfshost.com , which contains much mainline material. This would involve the complete political gagging on Mr. Tremaine. On October 26, 2011, in a decision that contained a strong dissenting opinion, a three-person panel of the Federal Court of Appeal overturned Mr. Tremaine's acquittal and entered a guilty verdict. In his dissenting opinion, Judge Denis Pelletier found the CHRT order vague. On November 23, 2011 Douglas Christie filed leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. In the recent conference call from Montreal, Federal Court Judge Harrington. demanded whether Mr. Poulin and Warman seriously wanted a man jailed "for something, the Supreme Court might decide he is not guilty of," Mr. Christie reported. Judge Harrington suggested waiting until the Supreme Court decides whether or not to grant leave. He twice repeated his question to Mr. Warman and, Mr. Christie reported, "never received a direct answer," just more preaching about the necessity to swiftly punish people for contempt of court. In the end, Warman and Poulin were given until April 10 to put their submissions in writing. Mr. Christie will have until My 10 to craft an answer. The Supreme Court usually responds to requests for leave to appeal within six months. As well, Bill C-304 which would repeal Sec., 13 - the Internet section of the Canadian Human Rights Act under which Mr. Tremaine was found guilty -- has received second reading and may well be law by the summer. "We will fight this every step of the way," the Battling Barrister vowed at the end of his remarks to the meeting sponsored by the Canadian Association for Free Expression. -- Paul Fromm _____________________________ Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp278.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqgmmwgguewwmw Powered by YourMailingListProvider

 

Warman & Canadian Human Rights Commission Still Itching to Send Terry Tremaine to Pri

Written by Paul Fromm

Thursday, 15 March 2012 07:00

*Warman & Canadian Human Rights Commission Still Itching to Send Terry Tremaine to Prison* ** *REGINA. March 13, 2012*. Speaking to a meeting of free speech stalwarts in Regina tonight Douglas Christie reported on a recent case management conference call regarding former political prisoner Terry Tremaine. Maitre Poulin, lawyer for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and complainant Richard Warman are pressing for an early sentencing hearing in the hopes of sending the Internet dissident to jail.[image: Warman & Canadian Human Rights Commission Still Itching to Send Terry Tremaine to Prison-027.jpg]<http://www.whitenewsnow.com/attachments/paul-fromms-cafe/433d1331794366-warman-canadian-human-rights-commission-still-itching-send-terry-tremaine-prison-027.jpg> On two complaints from chronic complainer Richard Warman, Mr. Tremaine faced a contempt of court hearing in Victoria in November, 2010. On November 29, trial judge Sean Harrington acquitted Mr.Tremaine of contempt of court as he had not been served with the court order until the summer of 2009. The federal court order was to enforce the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision of February, 2007 ordering Mr. Tremaine to "cease and desist" from posting on the Internet the same or similar passages that were found by the tribunal as being likely to "expose to hatred or contempt" privileged groups in Canada. Later in 2007, Mr., Tremaine made some further postings that he felt complied with the vague cease and desist order. These became the subject of the contempt of court charge. By the summer of 2009, Daniel Poulin had expanded his interpretation of "cease and desist "to mean taking down of Mr., Tremaine's website *http://nspcanada.nfshost.com* , which contains much mainline material. This would involve the complete political gagging on Mr. Tremaine. On October 26, 2011, in a decision that contained a strong dissenting opinion, a three-person panel of the Federal Court of Appeal overturned Mr. Tremaine's acquittal and entered a guilty verdict. In his dissenting opinion, Judge Denis Pelletier found the CHRT order vague. On November 23, 2011 Douglas Christie filed leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. In the recent conference call from Montreal, Federal Court Judge Harrington. demanded whether Mr. Poulin and Warman seriously wanted a man jailed "for something, the Supreme Court might decide he is not guilty of," Mr. Christie reported. Judge Harrington suggested waiting until the Supreme Court decides whether or not to grant leave. He twice repeated his question to Mr. Warman and, Mr. Christie reported, "never received a direct answer," just more preaching about the necessity to swiftly punish people for contempt of court. In the end, Warman and Poulin were given until April 10 to put their submissions in writing. Mr. Christie will have until My 10 to craft an answer. The Supreme Court usually responds to requests for leave to appeal within six months. As well, Bill C-304 which would repeal Sec., 13 - the Internet section of the Canadian Human Rights Act under which Mr. Tremaine was found guilty -- has received second reading and may well be law by the summer. "We will fight this every step of the way," the Battling Barrister vowed at the end of his remarks to the meeting sponsored by the Canadian Association for Free Expression. -- *Paul Fromm*