A rather bizarre criminal harassment trial is occurring in Toronto:
Indeed, Elliott’s chief sin appears to have been that he dared to disagree with the two young feminists and political activists.
He said the idea that all it takes to end up charged with criminal harassment is vigorous participation in online debate with those who will not brook dissent “will have a chilling effect on people’s ability to communicate, and not just on Twitter”.
Brian Lilley has a long interview with Christie Blatchford on the subject.
“Prosecutor Marnie Goldenberg made only the briefest remarks, and refused to provide Postmedia with a copy of her written arguments, saying it wasn’t her practice.”
Prosecutor Marnie Goldberg wants the hell away from this case as hard and as fast as possible. I’m guessing she pissed somebody in the CA’s office off pretty badly to get stuck with arguing it.
Look up “Volksgerichtshof”. That is precisely where this monstrosity is heading. Time to push back REAL HARD on these fascists.
Judging from the column, and previous columns on the case, it seems that if anyone should be facing charges it should the female complainants.
I a just world Elliot, after having this case dismissed, should be able to sue for damages from both the Crown and the litigants. Fat chance of that happening.
The system does not require the complainant to have skin in the game. The posting of a BOND (civil Suit) equal to damages & taxpayer costs would insure that only legitimate cases would proceed to trial.
The filing of silly criminal complaints is the fault of Government… If probable cause is deliberately dubious, look for the MONEY generated by & for lawyers & Courts.
JMHO
So now we can have Feminists & Muslims charged for online harassment for not agreeing with us??
Whoooohoooo
The legal system in this country is totally insane. I think various individual actors in it are trying to do what they think is a good job but no-one (or no organization) is overseeing the system as a whole. This should be the job of various legislatures in a properly run country but the judges scream that any legislative adjustment of the system is ‘interfering with their discretion and independence’ and so the legislatures back off. The problem is that the judiciary provides no systemic oversight either; they just decide individual cases.
This is why the system is messed up. No impetus for change arises from within the legal community because they all make really good money from the system as it is: it is bloated and grossly inefficient at reaching decisions but the people that run the system get paid by the hour.
Why didn’t the police and prosecution tell the whiny ladies to eff off and die? The whole thing makes them look stupid. I guess I shouldn’t discount the possibility that they like looking stupid.
The Femi-Nazis hard at work, who believe earnestly that ‘feelings’ are FACTS!
Talk about trumped up drivel.
Mr Elliot only had the misfortune of contradicting these ideological harridans.
Oh boo hoo, two of the ‘anointed’ politically correct Femi-Nazis had their
precious feelings called into question.
SOUND THE ALARM, CALL THE GESTAPO to shut down zis “Ungeheuer” to ze Femi-Nazi cause!
Wall to wall farce, from beginning to end.
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group ‘True North’
Again, Canada goes too far with the touchy-feely laws. Subjectively perceived harassment “good enough”?
Madness.
The bullies are always the first to go running to the authorities when their victims stand up for themselves.
Obama the Fink already want to turn monitoring the internet over to the United Nations like Big Brother wants
Sadly in Canada we do not have a Justice system just a legal system’
.
We must go to Don Corleone for justice.
I call it a lawyer system, not a justice nor a legal system.
My bet would be that this SLAPP proceeding gets tossed. Call me the eternal optimist; I find it necessary to keep my stomach pH in the safe range.
Mostly I agree. Except that it is a lawyer system that perpetuates itself, and the lawyer language determines what is and isn’t legal to the detriment of justice.
Justice is the best and sweetest thing that government can give to us.
In Fact, justice is the foundational reason that the multitude suffers government at all. We suffer government in the service of justice and civility for the betterment of all or in it’s absence we would descend into chaos and anarchy.
Adding to my above comment: When the alternative to chaos and anarchy is tyranny, I would choose chaos and anarchy to tyranny because it is my duty and the duty of all who value Liberty, to oppose and overthrow tyranny in hope that a state which sides with individual Liberty would rise to become the status quo(a free state which is in decline today).
However, it should be understood that Liberty itself is not without standards or guidance for Liberty must, to be maximized, have a framework within which it operates.
Freedom and form together in balance, maximize Liberty.
And I would argue that the Judeo-Christian philosophy, whether it is embraced by the individual or not, is the rightful and traditional historic champion of individual Liberty, regardless of whether an individual believes in God or not.
Additionally, if human rights are given to all people by birth, that we are Born Free by the Grace of God, that government has no right to abrogate our God given rights simply by fiat based on what is merely popular with ignorant people who are willing to sell their birthright forever for a mess of pottage this very day.
So when are the men of TO going to confront these nutcases on the street, and call them out? Oh wait. Men in TO. So are these harpies upset about no dates? Hey. You voted for it.
When is this country going to get a backbone again?
“When is this country going to get a backbone again?”
Solidarity. When there is solidarity then there will be a backbone.
Under which rubric, under which philosophy, under which ideological guidance do you think this country(God save the Queen, who is Head of State and Protector of the Faith) do you think we can reclaim our inheritance?
Here’s one of the disgusting feminists now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfRXLVz9Xp0
When you cut all the rhetoric about ideals and law and other obscuring factors, what we have is a man standing trial for thought crimes – unacceptable in a free society – only acceptable in a cowering authoritarian society.
BTW – the women at the center of this display deep misandrist reflexes.
Nothing to see here folks. This isn’t about freedom of speech or the pointless crusade of the social justice warrior; it’s about women being women.
Women are fascists and socialists by nature. Our ancestors knew this and thus prevented them from voting or holding positions of authority. In fact, under the law they were treated much the same as children, and rightfully so. Who can deny that in better times, these girls would have been dismissed with no more than some derisive laughter? If the divorce stats are to be believed less than 50% of women can rise above their childish mind sets. Only in a female empowered society could idiocy like this be taken seriously.
Whatever – the decisions made by stupid women and liberals are of no concern to me. (Unless they want to get stupid about it, of course…but that would mean somebody is going to get seriously hurt).
Well, Glenfithie, all I have to say to your rant is – no. Our ancestors did not think of women as proto-fascists. Generally it had to do with a belief that women were not as physically strong as men and were more nurturing. The women stayed at home while the men worked in the fields and mines and fought wars on behalf of the country. Modern times do not require this thinking because we have power tools and much more of work is brain work, rather than physical labour.
As far as women being weak goes, I give you the example of Margaret Thatcher. If our modern leaders had half of her forthrightness and attachment to principle then we would be far better off.
On the male end of the spectrum, I give you the example of Justin Trudeau. If he gets elected to run the country then only God can save us all.
I find it interesting that the judge is waiting till October to make her ruling. Probably waiting to see who is elected.