"It's the judge's courtroom. He can do what he wants."

This is precisely the attitude that concerns me about unelected Canadian judges -- that they can do whatever the heck they want or declare any edict that tickles their fancy. Would that they still to applying the law, not rewriting it, or creating ludicrous court room specific laws regarding things like wearing a poppy.

There are lots of archaic or arbitrary rules that should be dispensed with. For example, it's improper for anyone but a judge or Queen's counsel to wear silk in the courtroom -- a holdover from medieval sumptuary laws. And one of the few arguments in favour of knit neckties.

after the Oct. 31 proceeding, police and judicial representatives held a closed-door meeting and the issue has been resolved, Insp. Brian Larkin told the Record.

So my Guess, is no more poppy's in the court!

In my mind, anyone who is opposed to the poppy, and what it stands for, was on the wrong side. I am extremely proud of the job our armed forces have done in the past and continue to do today.

The poppy reminds us that the lifestyle we enjoy today comes at a cost. Anyone that has a problem with that should be tried for treason as they do not respect Canada or its men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice for the rest of us. Maybe these people, including this judge, should look at the poppy and then look in the mirror and ask themselves, "What have I done to make this country/world better?"

If I lived near that judge, I would organize a poppy day in that courtroom. Everyone in the door would have a poppy and see how that judge likes it.

I'd wager that the poppy offends less people than a turban on a police officer, yet we allow that.

This judge should have to answer to a room full of veterans why she feels their sacrifices are offensive.

[Deleted. Do NOT leave comments on my blog that advocate violence. - ED]

Nowhere in Canada is political correctness and ivory tower nonsense more prevalent than in law schools, bar associations, and the judiciary. It's like these people are in a competition to see who can be on the cutting edge of "progressive" thought, so they come up with more and more ludicrous standards of "sensitivity", and thereby become further removed from societal standards. And there's nobody to hold them accountable. If a symbol may possibly offend one in a thousand people, then it must be banned, even if there is no legitimate reason for anyone to be offended. In the end, our judges are entrusted with the interpretation of our charter, which in turn is supposed to protect our individual liberty. Be afraid. Judges are those to whom we must look to ultimately defend ourselves agains the tyranny of our "Human Rights" Commissions, for example. I wonder how Justice Woolcott feels about Richard Warman and all of the government initiated witch hunts against those who are deemed to deviate from the strict standards imposed on us from the ivory tower? A big fan I'll bet.

No real surprise here. Judges think that they are the law, they have forgotten (or don't care) who fought and died in order to allow us to have that law.

As per my commnet on Latimer, our justice system is a joke.

"However much you may think that's a totally acceptable symbol, and that is totally neutral, that might not be entirely the case for everybody who comes to court,"

Is this what that judge says to women wearing the hijab?

Sadly, we know the answer.

This is another example of unbridaled PC inanity being pontificated from the bench as judicial wisdom.

If this mutt of a judge thinks the symbol of respect for Canada's fallen defenders "offends" someone...who would that be?...possibly someone unCanadian...possibly an enemy of everything this nation has stood and fought for.

Personally I put this incident down to the low quality of candidate occupying the bench in degenerating Onterrible. This idiot's statement was just plain stupid and ignorant of realies... PC carried away her logic and civility...did she ever think that her anti-poppy attitude may be "offensive" to some people?..Naww impossible PC is ALWAYS correct..it cannot "offend"...it's opponents are just plain wrong...everyone knows that...at least all the lunatics on the Onterrible bench anyway.

a warning to women not to wear christmas ornament earrings or men to wear certain forms of mustache, (older women as well).

not everyone would be comfortable with them

I thought they taught the "reasonable man" standard in law school.

If 99.99% think something reasonable, the .01% is not reasonable.

This judge is incompetant and should be fired for that and her insolance and disregard for Canadian values.

This is why liberals should never be allowed to appoint judges nor be appointed. It's also why conservatives shouldn't kowtow to liberal whining when they're doing the appointing (as too many liberal a-holes have been appointed by both Mulroney AND Harper for fear of being branded "extreme." You know, cause banning the poppy isn't extreme.)

Just one more reason I hate leftards with the burning passion of a thousand suns.

The very sad truth is that this sort of anti-Canadian mindset has reached into many parts of the establishment that rules our nation. Try talking to officials in School Boards, Universities, Provincial agencies and so on. A climate of strict cultural/religous nutrality
has invaded out way of life.
It's a lucky thing for us this judge verbalized her mind set. Now listen for the same kinds of views in all our other establishments. The destruction of the building blocks of Canada's cultural norms and standards is nearing copletion.

I agree judges should be elected (and the Canadian judicial system is in serious need of an overhaul, right on up to the supreme court), but I can see what the judge was thinking here.

Where do you draw the line, and in a society so besotted with political correctness that we are unwilling to say one symbol is fine while another is not, it means we end up banning everything.

Not saying it's right.

How about we go look in the book named "Courtroom Procedures." If the book says that political and/or religious regalia is not allowed, then doesn't the judge have a right to say, "No officer, you can't wear that in my courtroom."
In any event, how would "not wearing your poppy" affect your testimony in court?? Don't you recall the Ontario judge who ousted a female lawyyer from her courtroom for wearing a "provocative neckline?" Guess what? The lawyer lost.
Personlly, I think poppies are a pain in the neck, and should be scrapped unless someone comes up with a better idea than that damned pin that sticks you in the chest!

Johnny Jesus you are the type of wanker that should have been burned in the ovens. You are so f..uped dumb and stupid

I just wish someone could come up with a better idea than giving life to aholes like you because you are a pain in the arse.

*
Remember this nugget of judicial wisdom?

"A left-leaning judge has shocked Toronto Police
with an order that uniformed cops could not
testify in his court if they wear their guns."

"Ontario Court Justice Melvyn Green told a
flabbergasted cop witness in a routine impaired
driving case Tuesday to "check his gun
somewhere."

*

Another reason that judges should be elected to accompany the Gomery quote that "it's like a slap in the face!" Judges are not appointed by God, most have been appointed by the Liberals, and I know this is hard to choke down for judges, but Liberals, as much as they believe otherwise are not the Second Coming, in fact they may actually be the Anti-Christ. As far as poppy fastening is concerned a number of years ago I met an old veteran and he had a Maple Leaf pin in the center of the poppy, it's worked for me ever since.

The poppy is a sign of remembrance to those that have fought & fallen for our country.
The Poppy is also a registered licensed product of the Royal Canadian Legion, With the funds raised going Veterans projects throughout Canada.

Johnny Jesus
The Poppy cannot be Purchased it is given by donation so if you don't want the Pin to stick you then Don't bother donating or if you wish to donate them don't accept the Poppy Iam sure the Vet that lost a limb & is still in a Vets Hospital or those that did not return would not like to inconvience you.

This Judge is no different then the one last year that ordered the Christmas Tree be taken down.
These Socialy/Politicaly In-Correct judges have Run their Course Time for Canadians to decide who will & won't sit on the benches.
Sound too american, Well Tough Iam sick & tired of this Crap.
Thanks Matt/Kate for bringing this tip forward

The inmates are running the asylum.

I wonder if the judge is a card carrying memeber of the NDP.

TJ, you stated "Where do you draw the line, and in a society so besotted with political correctness that we are unwilling to say one symbol is fine while another is not, it means we end up banning everything". Banning everything would be the next logical step for today's "progressives" except they are perfectly willing to ban some symbols for frivolous reasons, while protecting others that would be banned on much more legitimate grounds. The arbitrary determination as to what should be banned and what should not is happily made by those in power (see Human Rights Commissions, Canadian Judiciary) based on their own personal beliefs. Basically, everything that has anything to do with Canada's societal foundations or history, is fair game (ie, the poppy), as it represents the "old world" which we so desparately need to "progress" out of. Anything else is sacrosanct (see "Hijab"). I suspect Justice Woolcott would never see fit to ban a Che Guevera T-shirt in her court room.

that is one Stuck on Stupid judge.

BTW: did you notice that this took place on Oct.31/07 & this is Only coming to light Now?

Talk about banning things from court rooms, this one relates to banning as well.

There will be no nativity scene in the United State Congress, this year!

The Supreme Court has ruled that there cannot be a nativity scene in the United
States capital this Christmas season.

This isn't for any religious reason; they simply have not been able to find WISE MEN
and a VIRGIN in the nation's capitol.

There would have been no problem,
however, finding enough ASSES to fill the stable.

I posted on this several days ago, and Stephen Taylor left this excellent comment:

"Your honour, this symbol represents the sacrifice that braver Canadians than you or me made to have a free and fair court. It is a symbol, yes, much like the robes you wear and the gavel you use. It is this symbol which gives the ones you carry any authority, for without the sacrifice represented by those I honour, your symbols bear none."
-- Stephen Taylor

Someone needs to remind the judges that the courtrooms are not their's to do with as they please.
The judges may rule on matters of law or procedure and that should be the end of it.

Woolcott's name has come up before with ridiculous statements from the bench and outside the court as well! I say that deserves to be addressed.

The courts are a public institution and the justice branch of government exists to serve the interests of the public.
Certainly not to be a podium for the political views of arrogant fools and meddling busybodies. Least of all to be a tool for these same people to make law or rule above and beyond any law.

I think this is an insult to the people who fought in WW1 & WW2. They fought to bring democratic justice to the countries that Germany took over. Had a father and uncles who fought in both, had neighbors who fought for Germany and who fought against Germany. They seemed to get along fine. It would be very upstanding if the officer to say no, I do believe that this symbol, "poppy" represents that I respect what was fought and died for over in Europe. He most likely would have lost his job because his commanders would not want to rock the "political correctness boat".

He and the rest of the court room was probably in shock to hear a Judge to say something like this. It is about time that all government appointments be cancelled and they should run for an election just like the MPs do. The Constitution should be addressed by the Canadian people. Not your elected MP, because for the simple reason that they have failed miserably. Merle Underwood.

I think the quote Stephen Taylor is very good. I know it is quite obvious that this person could not be more wrong in her opinion on this symbol.

I hope that in the too few days remaining for our veterns from the Second World War that she discuss this and have the chance to have her thinking corrected. I know that if she was possessed with the truth on this symbol she would add it to the symbols she holds in court.

I WISH I COULD BEAM THIS WOMAN BACK TO THE FRONT LINES OF WW1 FRANCE OR THE BEACHES OF NORMANDY AND MAKE HER EXPERIENCE WHAT THESE BRAVE YOUNG GUYS WENT THROUGH. WHAT A DESPICABLE, THOUGHTLESS HUMAN BEING. THESE TYPES OF PEOPLE FORGET THAT MANY INDIVIDUALS DIED PROTECTING THE FREEDOMS AND PRIVILEGES THEY SO ENJOY TODAY.

This reminds me of the SCC judge who was quoted as saying that she makes the laws or something to that effect.
Dang, now I'm going to have to look it up otherwise it will bug me all day.

Cops aren't angels but they DO put their lives on the line, everyday, to protect yours and my ass.
That poppy is as much a part of the cops uniform, pre-Remembrance day, as his hat-badge. I can almost understand the symbolism of the judge disallowing police witnesses to wear their sidearms, but the power to make that decision ALSO flowed from the Veterans' sacrifices, as many other commenters have pointed out.
The system needs a needle to deflate some judges' egos.

Why do my Canadian flea friends, argue over who owns the dog!

Assert yourselves and start by ELECTING YOUR LEADERS.

Every single position of power in Canada is almost unattainable by the average joe. It is laughable to me that Canadians always tout themselves as free when no-one of any consequence appears on a ballot to be voted in by the peasants. All positions of power in Canada are appointed positions, subservient of course to a foreign monarch.

Tex,
Beverley McLachlin, in a speech delivered in New Zealand.
Judges should feel "emboldened" to trump the written word of the Constitution when protecting fundamental, unwritten principles and rights, Canada's Chief Justice says.
http://tinyurl.com/ynsfse
Cheers

I emailed my legion br. pres, exec, Vets Rep, Dominion command & ontario command
As a rule the legion don't get involved in politics, but said in my letter that a statement to this issue should be released.

testing

****I can almost understand the symbolism of the judge disallowing police witnesses to wear their sidearms,****

the side arm is a part of the poh-lees uniform, thus by LAW, it is to be worn when in uniform

so the judge (and I remember this coming up when it happened) was advocating the breaking on the law

elected or appointed, there should be court room protocols in place that a single judge at their discretion can not over rule. These protocols should only be amendable by commity at which the voters interest is represented!!!!

As I never tired of reminding my students, in the United States judges were normally politicians who got more votes than their opponents. In Canada, judges are drawn from politicians who get fewer votes than their opponents.

GYM; not necessarily. I noted this past Remembrance Day, that our local RCMP detachment paraded at the cenotaph weaponless.
As I said, I can understand that a police officer, testifying, should be treated as any other witness, with no articles which could be taken as intimidating to other witnesses or in fact the Court itself. The Sheriff's Dept. has the security of the court (or at least it does out here in B.C.).
But we're talking apples and oranges here. The Poppy IS worn as part of the uniform.
When you see what some of the defendants show up in, you've gotta give your head a shake.

GYM; sorry, further to the above. Perhaps Law Enforcement officers should testify in civvies? That'd certainly resolve the uniform issue; it's not like Detectives don't already do that(?)...
Question: if a cop is on trial (for an offense), should he/she wear their uniform? Seems like that ALSO might have an influential affect on a jury.

The poppy represents the freedom we have in this country to oppose, even the poppy itself, just like Johnny J... The judge in that court is able to adjudicate because of what that poppy she rejects symbolizes.

The problem is we have taken our freedom for granted. A new generation has come and does not appreciate what was sacrificed for them.

I am proud of my father's contribution in storming the beaches of Normandy, witnessing his comrades cut down as they pressed forward. All this so his children would be free from tyrannical regimes.

The court room today has forgotten this and has eroded those freedoms. THEY are becoming the source of tyranny in our land.

I imagine I would have been sent to jail for my comments to the judge should I have been there to witness those remarks.
I have had friends killed in action overseas the past couple of years. The Poppy means more to me now than it ever did. There is no one in this country that could make me take my Poppy off in that time of year.
Rest in Peace my Brothers and Sisters. I will remember you.
UBIQUE

Not surprisingly, it is difficult to find any information about this judge, whether a biography or any detail about past decisions (but for one - a dog shooting).

The bureaucrats are good at hiding detail from the public - sad because taxpayers pony up their salary.

And yet they'll claim to be above the 'rabble' when it comes to speaking to it.

What a shame this moron occupies a bench in this nation.

I'd be curious to see if she's on a political contributors list somewhere....

Fire the judge as she has demonstrated a severe lack of judgement and national pride, disqualifying her from being in any position of community responsibility.

Sorry but electing judges is not a good idea, for it should not be a popularity contest. However what is needed are set-terms for judges along with a tool to remove them from the bench when they overstep their mandate by making law and other forms of judicial activism.

As already mentioned there are serious problems with law schools, so an overhaul of them would also be in order.

"How about we go look in the book named "Courtroom Procedures." If the book says that political and/or religious regalia is not allowed, then doesn't the judge have a right to say, "No officer, you can't wear that in my courtroom.""

In Ontario a judge's robe IS "political regalia".

I cannot believe the collection of morons this site can attract!! If you were to place three dead cod on the beach, there'd be fewer seagulls that would show up than there are morons on this page.
For example: Pissedoff. I'll bet that two minutes after you typed up your blurt about the hatred of jews, (Quote: "that should have been burned in the ovens.) someone forwarded your comments to the Simon Wiesenthal Institution in Europe. They have tracking equipment that would make the CIA look like little Bo-Beep. I'll bet that in two minutes, they had your address and your phone number!
Every judge in every courtroom in North America has the right to prohibit certain items, clothes, etc. Here in rural Saskatchewan, the judges order farmers and ranchers to remove their hats in the courtroom. Yet in most public establishments, hats are socially acceptable. Does the judge hate farmers and ranchers?? No, he or she just don't like people wearing hats in their courtrooms.
As for "bryanr," who said anything about "buying" a poppy? Can't you read English??
If you want you need a silly little flower on your lapel to remember your ancestors who died for Canada, you must have a small and meager memory. I lost an uncle and cousin in WWII, we remember them every Nov. 11. I've never worn a poppy, and after witnessing the collection of bozos that I've seen here today, I think this country is in much more dire need of mental institutions than it is of poppy fields!!
If you want to belong to the right wing faction of Canada and/or the USA, why don't you start by getting educated and acting like intelligent citizens? Perhaps then we might form the next government!

Judges don't use gavels.

Johnny Jesus,

You may not wear a Poppy to remember, that's your choice. Calling it a "silly little flower" is more than a little insulting to those of us who have put our lives on the line.
No one has the right to tell me to take it off. I will abide by the judges decisions to ask that people take their hats off in the court, or to dress respectfully, but I cannot understand why any judge would think they have the right to tell someone to remove such an important and symbolic representation of our soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice, including your uncle and cousin.
Showing respect for those soldiers does not make us "right wing"; just proud and respectful.

Maybe you should go and talk to a veteran or two and learn what it is all about.

At the very least, learn when to keep your trap shut before insulting the symbol of something so significant to those of us who do understand.

UBIQUE

To: ABG. Please understand that I don't mean to be disrepectful to veterans by any means. My point is that the judge, in most North American court room settings, is in complete control of his or her courtroom.
The poppy is irrelelant. The point is that there may be a reason why the judge felt that the poppy shouldn't be worn--we don't have the court docket or the evidence in front of us.
In journalism as in law, it's important to know both sides of the story. The point is that we shouldn't start foaming at the mouth when we don't know the the five "W"s. (What, Why, When, Where and Whom.)
I don't beleive that people should publish racial hatred just becaue this is the net(Ex. "Pissedoff" who suggests I be burned in an oven because I don't like wearin a poppy.)
What will happen if people like "Pissedoff" don't wise up is that these web sites will be be taken off the web. As a matter of fact, at this very moment, certain "firewalls" won't allow access to SDA because of "Hate and violence." At least, that's what the pop up window reads.
I've said enough. You want to wear a poppy, go for it. My heart is where I keep Veterans!!

(Corrected Version.)
To: ABG. Please understand that I don't mean to be disrepectful to veterans by any means. My point is that the judge, in most North American court room settings, is in complete control of his or her courtroom.
The poppy is irrelevant. The point is that there may be a reason why the judge felt that the poppy shouldn't be worn--we don't have the court docket or the evidence in front of us.
In journalism as in law, it's important to know both sides of the story. The point is that we shouldn't start foaming at the mouth when we don't know the five "W"s. (What, Why, When, Where and Whom.)
I don't beleive that people should publish racial hatred just because this is the net, or they forgot their anti-pschyco meds on that particular day. (Ex. "Pissedoff" who suggests I be burned in an oven because I don't like wearing a poppy.)
What will happen in the end is that if people like "Pissedoff" don't wise up, these web sites will be be taken off the net.. As a matter of fact, at this very moment, certain "firewalls" won't allow access to SDA because of "Hate and violence." At least, that's what the pop up window reads.
I've said enough. You want to wear a poppy, go for it. My heart is where I keep Veterans!!

Everyone has a choice to wear it or not (except for those of us in uniform: it is part of it). Perhaps the judge thought there was a valid reason for the order to remove the poppy, though nothing I can think of could possibly be reason enough. As much as 'Pissedoff's comments were totally unacceptable; the adage 'two wrongs don't make a right' applies here. There was no need to belittle the Poppy to make your point.
You have the right not to wear the poppy, and to remember in your own way, just as I have the right (and in my case the duty) to wear it.
You may not have meant to be disrespectful to veterans, but you were.
Regards,
ABG