Clown Court

An argument for electing judges;

Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Graeme Mitchell appeared Sunday at a closing ceremony for a young Metis man whom he ruled was allowed to stay on the provincial legislature’s lawn to finish a hunger strike over suicide rates.
Mitchell dismissed the government’s bid to remove Tristen Durocher’s teepee and found the bylaws that prohibit overnight camping on the grounds infringed on his charter rights as an Indigenous man.
During his stop at Durocher’s camp, Mitchell spoke to him and accepted a Metis sash presented by a supporter.

23 Replies to “Clown Court”

    1. Question, is the hunger striker dead yet? Inquiring minds want to know. We know the judge is stupid but hey, there has to be more to this, I want a body!!!!

  1. Electing judges only works if you can prevent the criminal element from voting or donating to campaigns—or running for a seat on the bench.

    That includes both workshy drunken Indians and half-breeds and their fans in the lawyers’ cartel.

  2. One can be an activist or one can be a judge. One can’t properly be both. If one wishes to be an activist, run for the legislature. Otherwise, as a judge, apply the law.
    Imagine trying to play or watch a game with an “activist” referee.

  3. Curiously, only Canada’s aboriginal persons seem capable of going on 40 day hunger strikes without losing weight.

    1. The notion that electing judges produces better results than appointing judges is obvious nonsense. The United States elects judges, and it gets at least as many pure morons on the bench as do we.

      1. I think the point the commentor is trying to make is that there is nothing you or I can do to remove an appointed judge, unlike an elected official. You are quite right that it does not guarantee moral or ethical judgement, the absence of activism, but at least they can be removed at some point by the will of the people. Right now the only way to remove a judicial appointee in this country is for them to die of natural causes or by assassination.

      2. The purity rate for judicial morons here in the States is much higher than in the Territories and Provinces. However, Canada is slightly ahead in half-assity. Or maybe it’s vice versa.

  4. Also Blacklock reports that whiny indians in Alberta are demanding that only indian judges be allowed to handle cases involving indians.

    1. And why not, in Saskatchewan you have all white juries, the juries in this province are not chosen as they should be, there was no broad spectrum of the population at G Stanley’s trial.

  5. An argument for electing judges? More like an argument for making it easy to disbarr or impeach them. It should be very easy to remove unsatisfactory judges from the bench. But it isn’t.

    In the history of Canada, has a judge ever been removed from the bench at any level? I do not think it has ever happened, or is even possible under any circumstance.

  6. I love it. This brings us one small step closer to the nullification of Crown sovereignty over Canada, thanks to an activist judiciary. IOW, we are approaching a point where we can ignore all federal and provincial law, cease paying all taxes and live as Indians under what passes for civilization under tribal stone age existence. We, the 97% of Canadians who fall short of the requisite 1/16th Indian blood status can choose to fall in line with tribal leadership suddenly starving to death from lack of federal support, kill them off, makes slaves of them, or better still, build a new society of equals before the law where judges are prevented from making up rights and titles.

  7. The problem that most miss in this affair is that we have been ‘diversified’ beyond recognition as Canadians. The Liberals have over the years been successful in eroding and diluting the Canadian character. Isolating the “Natives” (read first immigrants), then separating and widening the English/French schism, restricting immigration from Western/Eastern Europe while opening the gates from underdeveloped Third World countries, and now we have the remnants of a culture that has devolved into tribal fractions. Indian, Metis, English, French, and a dozen or more foreign cultures can in no way lead to a unified nation and that is the Liberal’s plan. The meme of “Diversity is our Strength” is only true for the Liberal elite for as long as we are divided by diversity, the Liberals will rule, not govern. The law in a unified culture must by definition be unbiased, when tribal laws, be they Indigenous, secular, or altruistic, supersede the cultural norm then there is no cultural norm and therefore no law or order.

  8. To be a judge in Canada is simple. First become a lawyer. Then decide you are a crappy lawyer – can’t make any money at it. Throw a Liberal party fundraiser. Voila! You are appointed a judge.
    There should be regulations that require a lawyer to have a minimum 20 years practising law. Said lawyer must also have published at least two peer reviewed legal thesis concerning actual issues in legislation with a suggested solution to the problem caused.
    It might not solve the problem but it would keep some of the idiots out. If you can’t make 20 years practising law you won’t be a judge.

  9. It was John Diefenbaker that created the Canadian Supreme Court, before that the Court of Final Judgement was in England & British LAW was the Rule of the Land… The Liberals under PET used the Canadian Supreme Court to create False Social Justice rights Per the EU/UN ……The good thing is that getting rid of the Canadian Supreme Court was anticipated & that method is provided as part of the ACT…. Final judgement would then follow British LAW


    1. I think following the current british law is something even the brits would like to stop doing. we sure don’t need to make things any worse here in canada.