Fredericton Shelters, funding information.
The City of Fredericton has taken various steps that have resulted in the city being an 'inconvenient' place to be in terms of the less advantaged.
The closing of the downtown bottle depot. Every nice day we see shopping carts of bottles moving to the north side bottle depot.The closing of both Salvation Army stores. Failing to maintain the inter city bus terminal in the downtown area, making it in accessible.
Mayor speaks about doing his own investigation to find out if the people using the soup kitchen and food bank are in fact residents of Fredericton. January 15, 2009
June 2010
Kelly Lamrock addresses the shelter/poverty issue.
January , 2011
bloggercharles : "did you visit the shelter in 2010?"
Mayor "no"
March 1, 2012
Mayor still has not stepped foot inside the homeless shelter.
Thursday, 23 February 2012
Tuesday, 21 February 2012
Contradictons 101
P.C. MLA Jeannot Volpe does not agree with pension.
Now Volpe takes fight to human rights to keep it!
********************************************************************************
Mayor Brad Woodside stating he has an agreement with police and fire departments. "I get the telephone call, sometimes it could be 2 o'clock in the morning, sometimes it's 10 o'clock at night" "they will both make sure I am informed on what's going on". January 21, 2011.
Mayor Brad Woodside is quoted in the Daily Gleaner saying "Never have the police called me to give me a heads up or ask my thoughts or feedback". February 7, 2012 Article headline "Mayor won't intervene in case"
**********************************************************************************
Fredericton Police officer issuing a 3rd party ticket and explaining the process. July 9, 2011
Mayor Brad Woodside stating 3rd party tickets are wrong, and should not be issued, to Charles or anyone else.January 3, 2012. Reminder: March 16, 2012 court date for 3rd party ticket.
**********************************************************************************
Mayor states "...my word is my bond"
November 24, 2011 press conference expressing confidence in the Mayors "word" that he will not destroy occupy Fredericton.
Occupy Fredericton is destroyed, January 3, 2012
*********************************************************************************
Now Volpe takes fight to human rights to keep it!
********************************************************************************
Mayor Brad Woodside stating he has an agreement with police and fire departments. "I get the telephone call, sometimes it could be 2 o'clock in the morning, sometimes it's 10 o'clock at night" "they will both make sure I am informed on what's going on". January 21, 2011.
Mayor Brad Woodside is quoted in the Daily Gleaner saying "Never have the police called me to give me a heads up or ask my thoughts or feedback". February 7, 2012 Article headline "Mayor won't intervene in case"
**********************************************************************************
Fredericton Police officer issuing a 3rd party ticket and explaining the process. July 9, 2011
Mayor Brad Woodside stating 3rd party tickets are wrong, and should not be issued, to Charles or anyone else.January 3, 2012. Reminder: March 16, 2012 court date for 3rd party ticket.
**********************************************************************************
Mayor states "...my word is my bond"
November 24, 2011 press conference expressing confidence in the Mayors "word" that he will not destroy occupy Fredericton.
Occupy Fredericton is destroyed, January 3, 2012
*********************************************************************************
Friday, 17 February 2012
Fractions, precentages, and fines! oh my!
In 2009 a published article stated that a "Survey of Fredericton police officers finds poor morale within force". The report clearly stated that "only 10 per cent of survey respondents had confidence in MacKnight,
while 26 per cent had confidence in Deputy Chief Leanne Fitch.
The article also questioned the chief's accessibility, his vision for the future, and his ability to communicate effectively.".
"Labour management seems to be a problem there," Woodside said. "I have spoken to the city administrator. I have spoken to the chief and I want morale back where it should be and I want these issues dealt with."
"The survey suggested that a climate of fear exists within the force and that members feel MacKnight believes all public complaints made against officers."
In an interview with blogger charles, featuring Jordan Graham didn't offer much clarity regarding the report other than to mention that the satisfaction surveys showed people were happy.
Leap forward to February 15, 2012. CTV news published an article stating "Fredericton Police Force under the microscope" . The article was in reference to a New Brunswick Police "The commission's 2010-2011 report says they received 129 allegations and that more than 60 were regarding members of the Fredericton force. That was more than twice as many as the forces in Miramichi and Saint John"
Chief of police, B.McKnight insists the numbers are incorrect. According to Pierre Beaudoin his organization stands by the numbers in the report. "This year the commission compiled its data by allegations and not per complaint" he said. Beaudoin also added "The number of allegations is correct" The article goes on to say that even if the Chiefs claim that the number is only 29, it still remains the highest in the province.
"The chief states that 90% of the residents of Fredericton were 'very' satisfied or "somewhat' satisfied with the job being done by the force. McKnight says that of the 29 complaints, 5 were valid.
It's an extreme shift in numbers. In 2009 the complaint was that the chief believed "all" complaints. I assume that could be an exaggeration so let's settle with 90%, even 80%, and there was "fear". Now, only 5 out of 29 were valid. Reduced from "all" to almost "nothing". 90 or 80/100 , to 5/29 or 5/63 when it's allegations. Some complaints contain several allegations.
The police shouldn't be able to incorrectly and loosely interpret the law, such as in this , Officer issues/explains 3rd party tickets. Uploaded June 9,2011
This is an image of the ticket dated July 9. Court is still pending in March.
Uploaded Jul 9, 2011- officer issues/explains 3rd Party Ticket.
There is a court date set in March. Even though the Mayor says that the ticket should not have been issued, and no on should receive a ticket that way. listen to the mayor here. www.fredericton.ca has the information on it's website stating the penalty is 50.00 Date: June 29, 2011 Time: 1210 hrs Sender: Cst. Rick Mooney .
The incorrect amount is one thing, but being issued a ticket because another civilian said they saw you last week, or even last month for that matter, is outrageous.
Then, there is the matter of the challenge to that ticket being issued in a 3rd party anonymous way. Some prominent people were filmed jaywalking. Albert MLA Wayne Steeves is caught Jaywalking by Blogger
and a police report was filed, Wayne Steeves MLA for Albert was reported to the Fredericton Police for Jaywalking last Friday | Nov 25, 2011
MLA Steves did not receive a ticket.
Many times we hear, "the law has to be applied to everyone equally", clearly it isn't. Yet, Charles has a court date for March for that case as well ticket for riding a bike with no helmet. The timings are 1:30 and 2:00pm. respectively.
Happy Friday.
Cheers and Beers.
.
The article also questioned the chief's accessibility, his vision for the future, and his ability to communicate effectively.".
"Labour management seems to be a problem there," Woodside said. "I have spoken to the city administrator. I have spoken to the chief and I want morale back where it should be and I want these issues dealt with."
"The survey suggested that a climate of fear exists within the force and that members feel MacKnight believes all public complaints made against officers."
In an interview with blogger charles, featuring Jordan Graham didn't offer much clarity regarding the report other than to mention that the satisfaction surveys showed people were happy.
Leap forward to February 15, 2012. CTV news published an article stating "Fredericton Police Force under the microscope" . The article was in reference to a New Brunswick Police "The commission's 2010-2011 report says they received 129 allegations and that more than 60 were regarding members of the Fredericton force. That was more than twice as many as the forces in Miramichi and Saint John"
Chief of police, B.McKnight insists the numbers are incorrect. According to Pierre Beaudoin his organization stands by the numbers in the report. "This year the commission compiled its data by allegations and not per complaint" he said. Beaudoin also added "The number of allegations is correct" The article goes on to say that even if the Chiefs claim that the number is only 29, it still remains the highest in the province.
"The chief states that 90% of the residents of Fredericton were 'very' satisfied or "somewhat' satisfied with the job being done by the force. McKnight says that of the 29 complaints, 5 were valid.
It's an extreme shift in numbers. In 2009 the complaint was that the chief believed "all" complaints. I assume that could be an exaggeration so let's settle with 90%, even 80%, and there was "fear". Now, only 5 out of 29 were valid. Reduced from "all" to almost "nothing". 90 or 80/100 , to 5/29 or 5/63 when it's allegations. Some complaints contain several allegations.
The police shouldn't be able to incorrectly and loosely interpret the law, such as in this , Officer issues/explains 3rd party tickets. Uploaded June 9,2011
This is an image of the ticket dated July 9. Court is still pending in March.
Uploaded Jul 9, 2011- officer issues/explains 3rd Party Ticket.
The incorrect amount is one thing, but being issued a ticket because another civilian said they saw you last week, or even last month for that matter, is outrageous.
Then, there is the matter of the challenge to that ticket being issued in a 3rd party anonymous way. Some prominent people were filmed jaywalking. Albert MLA Wayne Steeves is caught Jaywalking by Blogger
and a police report was filed, Wayne Steeves MLA for Albert was reported to the Fredericton Police for Jaywalking last Friday | Nov 25, 2011
MLA Steves did not receive a ticket.
Many times we hear, "the law has to be applied to everyone equally", clearly it isn't. Yet, Charles has a court date for March for that case as well ticket for riding a bike with no helmet. The timings are 1:30 and 2:00pm. respectively.
Happy Friday.
Cheers and Beers.
.
Wednesday, 15 February 2012
Get a Grip
This isn't about liking or siding with anyone, nor does anyone's personal opinion matter in regards to Charles Leblanc, his social status,source of income,etc. It's about OUR civil rights, everyone , Charles just happens to be the one facing up to two years in jail at the moment.
Have you or someone in your home committed criminal libel?
Have you ever got pissed off online and called someone a name on facebook? Maybe it was in a public forum for all to read, or in a blog. Perhaps your son or daughter has, or will, or might. Maybe you know of some comments that you've already read online that, in this sense, could be considered libel. Your probably thinking to yourself, yes, people get called names all the time online.
Consider this.
If they (the victim) keep a copy of it, technically, the way Fredericton Police are currently operating, you can print it out, take it in , maybe as easy as email it to them, they can raid and confiscate all electronic devices, monitors and speakers included, and your DSL modem/router, killing your access to the internet, unless you go get a replacement which is your own cost. (well, that's what they did in this case)
http://justiceinthe21stcentury.blogspot.com/2012/02/search-warrant-and-arrest-of-charles.html
The problem is, it's a police officer who complained about the libel quoted in the search warrant. The ITO (bits and pieces of it) that was released/quoted in the paper, The Daily Gleaner, suggests the witness are also police officers. (based on the limited information quoted) Very unique and troubling.
If you or I went to the police with proof of libel, they'd tell us to go get a lawyer and sue. In this case the Fredericton police force chose to use a rarely used section of the criminal code that has already been deemed unconstitutional. The officer could sue Charles, but that would be silly/useless. Charles is on social assistance and the officer wouldn't get a dime. You can't get blood from a stone, but perhaps you can send it to jail for a while to shut it up.
That is why the Canadian Civil Liberties Association is concerned about this case.
Here is the CBC Information Morning interview with the CCLA.
So, Fredericton, do you believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? I do, fiercely.
Perhaps people take their rights and freedoms for granted, life is good , but consider that there are times that civil liberties are being denied, and when that happens, we all need to be concerned, no matter what your opinion is regarding the particular person whose rights are being violated.
Another great example of Charles Leblanc being singled out by the police unjustly at the Atlantica demonstration in Saint John.
Have you or someone in your home committed criminal libel?
Have you ever got pissed off online and called someone a name on facebook? Maybe it was in a public forum for all to read, or in a blog. Perhaps your son or daughter has, or will, or might. Maybe you know of some comments that you've already read online that, in this sense, could be considered libel. Your probably thinking to yourself, yes, people get called names all the time online.
Consider this.
If they (the victim) keep a copy of it, technically, the way Fredericton Police are currently operating, you can print it out, take it in , maybe as easy as email it to them, they can raid and confiscate all electronic devices, monitors and speakers included, and your DSL modem/router, killing your access to the internet, unless you go get a replacement which is your own cost. (well, that's what they did in this case)
http://justiceinthe21stcentury.blogspot.com/2012/02/search-warrant-and-arrest-of-charles.html
The problem is, it's a police officer who complained about the libel quoted in the search warrant. The ITO (bits and pieces of it) that was released/quoted in the paper, The Daily Gleaner, suggests the witness are also police officers. (based on the limited information quoted) Very unique and troubling.
If you or I went to the police with proof of libel, they'd tell us to go get a lawyer and sue. In this case the Fredericton police force chose to use a rarely used section of the criminal code that has already been deemed unconstitutional. The officer could sue Charles, but that would be silly/useless. Charles is on social assistance and the officer wouldn't get a dime. You can't get blood from a stone, but perhaps you can send it to jail for a while to shut it up.
That is why the Canadian Civil Liberties Association is concerned about this case.
Here is the CBC Information Morning interview with the CCLA.
So, Fredericton, do you believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? I do, fiercely.
Perhaps people take their rights and freedoms for granted, life is good , but consider that there are times that civil liberties are being denied, and when that happens, we all need to be concerned, no matter what your opinion is regarding the particular person whose rights are being violated.
Another great example of Charles Leblanc being singled out by the police unjustly at the Atlantica demonstration in Saint John.
Playing the Numbers Game
Fredericton's "finest" made the front page of the newspaper, again. More bad PR.This latest round of what appears to be an endless stream of bad publicity for the force is based upon the results of a report compiled by the New Brunswick Police Commission.
The NB Police Commission released an annual report stating it received "129 allegations" 63 of which were directed towards the Fredericton Police, Miramichi came in second with 18 allegations, and Saint John is in third spot with 16 allegations.
The article goes on to say.....
"Despite the statistics, Fredericton police Chief Barry MacKnight said the number of complaints is 29 and not 63." and that "the commission is counting multiple allegations contained in single complaints as separate beefs"
McKnight goes on to say, using a specific complaint for an example, that "allegations were made against three officers with four sections of the Police act identified as possible violations" , "the commission counts that as twelve". The chief was "gobsmacked when I saw the number", as he should be.
Pierre Beaudoin his organization stands by the numbers in the report. "This year the commission compiled its data by allegations and not per complaint" he said. Beaudoin also added "The number of allegations is correct" The article goes on to say that even if the Chiefs claim that the number is only 29, it still remains the highest in the province.
If the commission were to use the method described by McKnight, one can only assume that the numbers for Miramichi and Saint John would also be considerably lower than the report suggests. It's almost like the chief is more concerned about the numbers than the actual complaints, not to mention the complainants.
The chief states that 90% of the residents of Fredericton were 'very' satisfied or "somewhat' satisfied with the job being done by the force. What about the 10%? McKnight says that of the '29' complaints, 5 were vaild. 5 out of 29? That sounds like 24 frivolous complaints were filed and dismissed.
Beaudoin pointed out a 'situation involving a repetitious complainer", gee, we all wonder who that could be. Could it be the blogger who was issued a ticket in July for riding a bike on a sidewalk in June, a complaint made by an anonymous third party who wasn't a police officer? Could it be the blogger who was arrested for 'assault' for stepping on the grass of the legislature? Could it be the blogger who was beckoned across the street by an officer and issued a ticket for having no bicycle helmet on, the ticket shoved into his camera and an allegation that the officer raised his knee and made contact with his genitals? Could it be the blogger who was raided and arrested for Criminal Libel under section 301 of the criminal code of Canada and had all of his computer equipment confiscated? The escalation is impressive, yet embarrassing. Embarrassing to the police, and embarrassing to the citizens of Fredericton who deserve better, and expect more than that from a police force.
Fredericton citizens deserve better. They deserve to have a police force that respects them, and they might start to get a little respect in return. Just because someone is wearing the uniform, doesn't mean they will get, nor do they deserve respect from the community. They need to show they are here to 'serve and protect' and they haven't done that lately.
Perhaps Chief McKnight will break down the numbers for us, and tell us which officer had the most complaints, or if he won't release the name, at least reassure people that they are going to remove the officer or officers that is/are tarnishing the rest of the force. McKnight should also share what the allegations are, all 63.
Is anyone else concerned about the criminal libel arrest under section 301 of the criminal code? The complaint was made by an officer, and all of the witnesses mentioned in the ITO are also police officers? How about that three superior courts of Canada have deemed section 301 unconstitutional? Concerned yet? How about the Canadian Civil Liberties Association also stepping in to question McKnight regarding this arrest/raid/and seizure of property.
Where is Mayor Brad Woodside in all of this? During the Stafford fiasco, in which an officer kneed a man on the spine 4 times and broke a vertebrae in the mans back. (oh but he didn't mean to he said in testimony), Woodside was steadfast that his brave officers were doing a great job and that this was an unfortunate incident. Unfortunate for the man with the broken bones indeed. I believe in the testimony the officer used the words "I was scared".
Even more insulting is Chief McKnight dismissing the fact that there are 63 allegations of misconduct, and trying to package it all into a smaller number. That, along with the fact that he is trying to cling to the 90% "satisfied and somewhat satisfied" people to dismiss the 10% entirely.
McKnight would like to play with numbers rather than deal with the real issue of lack of respect, trust, and confidence among residents. Mayor Woodside also seems to be swimming in denial. Some words of wisdom from the infamous anonymous 12 step program. "admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery"
The NB Police Commission released an annual report stating it received "129 allegations" 63 of which were directed towards the Fredericton Police, Miramichi came in second with 18 allegations, and Saint John is in third spot with 16 allegations.
The article goes on to say.....
"Despite the statistics, Fredericton police Chief Barry MacKnight said the number of complaints is 29 and not 63." and that "the commission is counting multiple allegations contained in single complaints as separate beefs"
McKnight goes on to say, using a specific complaint for an example, that "allegations were made against three officers with four sections of the Police act identified as possible violations" , "the commission counts that as twelve". The chief was "gobsmacked when I saw the number", as he should be.
Pierre Beaudoin his organization stands by the numbers in the report. "This year the commission compiled its data by allegations and not per complaint" he said. Beaudoin also added "The number of allegations is correct" The article goes on to say that even if the Chiefs claim that the number is only 29, it still remains the highest in the province.
If the commission were to use the method described by McKnight, one can only assume that the numbers for Miramichi and Saint John would also be considerably lower than the report suggests. It's almost like the chief is more concerned about the numbers than the actual complaints, not to mention the complainants.
The chief states that 90% of the residents of Fredericton were 'very' satisfied or "somewhat' satisfied with the job being done by the force. What about the 10%? McKnight says that of the '29' complaints, 5 were vaild. 5 out of 29? That sounds like 24 frivolous complaints were filed and dismissed.
Beaudoin pointed out a 'situation involving a repetitious complainer", gee, we all wonder who that could be. Could it be the blogger who was issued a ticket in July for riding a bike on a sidewalk in June, a complaint made by an anonymous third party who wasn't a police officer? Could it be the blogger who was arrested for 'assault' for stepping on the grass of the legislature? Could it be the blogger who was beckoned across the street by an officer and issued a ticket for having no bicycle helmet on, the ticket shoved into his camera and an allegation that the officer raised his knee and made contact with his genitals? Could it be the blogger who was raided and arrested for Criminal Libel under section 301 of the criminal code of Canada and had all of his computer equipment confiscated? The escalation is impressive, yet embarrassing. Embarrassing to the police, and embarrassing to the citizens of Fredericton who deserve better, and expect more than that from a police force.
Fredericton citizens deserve better. They deserve to have a police force that respects them, and they might start to get a little respect in return. Just because someone is wearing the uniform, doesn't mean they will get, nor do they deserve respect from the community. They need to show they are here to 'serve and protect' and they haven't done that lately.
Perhaps Chief McKnight will break down the numbers for us, and tell us which officer had the most complaints, or if he won't release the name, at least reassure people that they are going to remove the officer or officers that is/are tarnishing the rest of the force. McKnight should also share what the allegations are, all 63.
Is anyone else concerned about the criminal libel arrest under section 301 of the criminal code? The complaint was made by an officer, and all of the witnesses mentioned in the ITO are also police officers? How about that three superior courts of Canada have deemed section 301 unconstitutional? Concerned yet? How about the Canadian Civil Liberties Association also stepping in to question McKnight regarding this arrest/raid/and seizure of property.
Where is Mayor Brad Woodside in all of this? During the Stafford fiasco, in which an officer kneed a man on the spine 4 times and broke a vertebrae in the mans back. (oh but he didn't mean to he said in testimony), Woodside was steadfast that his brave officers were doing a great job and that this was an unfortunate incident. Unfortunate for the man with the broken bones indeed. I believe in the testimony the officer used the words "I was scared".
Even more insulting is Chief McKnight dismissing the fact that there are 63 allegations of misconduct, and trying to package it all into a smaller number. That, along with the fact that he is trying to cling to the 90% "satisfied and somewhat satisfied" people to dismiss the 10% entirely.
McKnight would like to play with numbers rather than deal with the real issue of lack of respect, trust, and confidence among residents. Mayor Woodside also seems to be swimming in denial. Some words of wisdom from the infamous anonymous 12 step program. "admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery"
Monday, 13 February 2012
Let's Talk About Libel
Criminal Libel. A law in the criminal code of Canada that's been found to be unconstitutional in three provincial courts. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is deeply concerned that this law is being held against a Canadian, and suggests they are ready to intervene.
There have been plenty of newspaper articles on the subject. CBC, CTV, and numerous independent news sources in print and online, have covered what seems to be considered by some as an outrageous act by our municipal police who have a long colorful history in regards to the "accused"
I believe in the rule of law. I believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I think most Canadians would agree with that statement. However, when I read the comment section of the CBC news articles regarding Charles Leblanc, and the charge of criminal libel, I am almost at a loss for words. That doesn't happen very often.
Some people like Charles Leblanc, some don't. We don't convict people to jail sentences for up to 2 years because 'some people don't like you'. Some have said "he had it coming, he's a loud mouth". Again, I don't see a criminal element in that statement worthy of incarceration. One particular irksome quip was "the police don't know what else to do with him", well, the Fredericton Police Community Policing Policy (online at fredericton.ca) seems to suggest they are working hard at understanding and dealing with people with mental health issues. Really? The police department failed miserably on this PR task. The comments are shocking. People actually suggesting we lock people away in jail for being 'annoying', 'outspoken', or even lacking social graces.
Some of the residents of Fredericton support Charles Leblanc and are regular readers of his blog. Charles can sometimes pump out news articles hours before mainstream media picks it up, if they pick it up at all. He's downtown in the thick of things. Community events, protests, the political landscape, he covers it all. Some would call him a journalist, others boo and hiss that unless he carry's a degree in journalism, he's just a guy with time on his hands.
There are some that dislike Charles Leblanc, but are still able to understand the seriousness of the local police using s.301 against a citizen. To me, that is rational thinking. Being able to understand that even if someone is considered an 'asshole' in their view, still has the same rights as they do, under the charter of rights. Kudos for rational thinkers.
The police have released some bits and pieces of the ITO to the local newspaper, which most people don't read since the newspaper put a pay wall up on it's site. They are asking more $ than a New York Times subscription, I wish them well with that. Most, if not all residents are aware that with a library card they can read the articles online for free.
The legal community in Fredericton is 'mum' regarding the case. I have put out some inquiries but no one seems to want to be involved in any way. I finally was able to get an explanation from one source, who, 'wishes to remain anonymous', that the legal community in Fredericton relies heavily on the business of government for their hard earned pay. Now it makes sense to me why no eager lawyer, devoted to upholding our rights and freedoms, has come forward. My source suggests that "they (the legal community in fredericton) feed from the government troughs, and aren't willing to risk that". That's wonderful, a legal community that abandons unpopular cases because of politics?
As of late, it's been suggested in local news that the mayor has not followed the rule of law regarding the occupy frederiction eviction, citing a questionable or incomplete bylaw. Meanwhile, supporters of the mayor say (comments publicly made on the CBC and CTV websites) "you did what you had to do", and "we support you, those occupiers need to go have showers and get haircuts".
Fredericton boasts that it's a multicultural and diverse city. Comments on the CBC and CTV website don't suggest that is true at all. The comments suggest that Fredericton residents are intolerant of the poor and homeless community. Comments also suggest that young people with long hair, are homeless hippies. Comments also suggest that the unemployed and people on welfare, are lazy people taking advantage of the system. Tolerant? Not even close.
It would appear that many Fredericton residents don't know what the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is, or why we have it in place. Even more shocking is the inference that it shouldn't be used to protect a citizen who they personally may not 'like'. That type of ignorance coming from a community that has been listed at one of the 'top seven intelligent communities'. Sadly, the commentary coming out of the population hasn't sounded very intelligent at all.
I think the Mayor, everyone in city hall, including the police department, should invite the CCLA to visit and give them a course of civil liberties, how they apply to ALL Canadians, and why they need to be respected.
The argument has been taken to the public arena now, and it can only make the police department and city hall look more and more tyrannical and abusive. Libel chill has filled the air, and only a handful of people are ready and willing to speak out about it, I am one of those people.
I believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It's for me, and you. It's for my friends, my family, and my foes and naysayers. It's for the law abiding, and for the criminally convicted. It's for the rich, and the poor. It's for those with mental health issues, and for the scholars. It's for EVERYONE, and when citizens lightly make comments that the charter shouldn't protect 'some people', it shows the ignorance and complacency that has permeated our community.
I can only hope that some of the residents of Fredericton open their minds and eyes to what arresting someone using s.301 of the criminal code actually means, and why it should be removed from the criminal code. The CCLA believes that, and so many other powerful intelligent lawyers and professors around the country.
If the Fredericton Police Force, and the Crown, proceed with the actual charge of Criminal Libel under section 301 of the criminal code, the case will set a precedent to all of those facebook users who might hurl an insult via text online. Slander is spoken, libel is written, so the law states. People across the country could be hauled in to answer to a one line quote that hurt someone else's feelings. But, according to some residents in Fredericton, "lock them up and throw away the key". Clean streets and a zombie like population that knows better than to challenge or complain about anyone in authority. When we can't criticize and challenge the people we have elected, we cease to remain a free society.
There have been plenty of newspaper articles on the subject. CBC, CTV, and numerous independent news sources in print and online, have covered what seems to be considered by some as an outrageous act by our municipal police who have a long colorful history in regards to the "accused"
I believe in the rule of law. I believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I think most Canadians would agree with that statement. However, when I read the comment section of the CBC news articles regarding Charles Leblanc, and the charge of criminal libel, I am almost at a loss for words. That doesn't happen very often.
Some people like Charles Leblanc, some don't. We don't convict people to jail sentences for up to 2 years because 'some people don't like you'. Some have said "he had it coming, he's a loud mouth". Again, I don't see a criminal element in that statement worthy of incarceration. One particular irksome quip was "the police don't know what else to do with him", well, the Fredericton Police Community Policing Policy (online at fredericton.ca) seems to suggest they are working hard at understanding and dealing with people with mental health issues. Really? The police department failed miserably on this PR task. The comments are shocking. People actually suggesting we lock people away in jail for being 'annoying', 'outspoken', or even lacking social graces.
Some of the residents of Fredericton support Charles Leblanc and are regular readers of his blog. Charles can sometimes pump out news articles hours before mainstream media picks it up, if they pick it up at all. He's downtown in the thick of things. Community events, protests, the political landscape, he covers it all. Some would call him a journalist, others boo and hiss that unless he carry's a degree in journalism, he's just a guy with time on his hands.
There are some that dislike Charles Leblanc, but are still able to understand the seriousness of the local police using s.301 against a citizen. To me, that is rational thinking. Being able to understand that even if someone is considered an 'asshole' in their view, still has the same rights as they do, under the charter of rights. Kudos for rational thinkers.
The police have released some bits and pieces of the ITO to the local newspaper, which most people don't read since the newspaper put a pay wall up on it's site. They are asking more $ than a New York Times subscription, I wish them well with that. Most, if not all residents are aware that with a library card they can read the articles online for free.
The legal community in Fredericton is 'mum' regarding the case. I have put out some inquiries but no one seems to want to be involved in any way. I finally was able to get an explanation from one source, who, 'wishes to remain anonymous', that the legal community in Fredericton relies heavily on the business of government for their hard earned pay. Now it makes sense to me why no eager lawyer, devoted to upholding our rights and freedoms, has come forward. My source suggests that "they (the legal community in fredericton) feed from the government troughs, and aren't willing to risk that". That's wonderful, a legal community that abandons unpopular cases because of politics?
As of late, it's been suggested in local news that the mayor has not followed the rule of law regarding the occupy frederiction eviction, citing a questionable or incomplete bylaw. Meanwhile, supporters of the mayor say (comments publicly made on the CBC and CTV websites) "you did what you had to do", and "we support you, those occupiers need to go have showers and get haircuts".
Fredericton boasts that it's a multicultural and diverse city. Comments on the CBC and CTV website don't suggest that is true at all. The comments suggest that Fredericton residents are intolerant of the poor and homeless community. Comments also suggest that young people with long hair, are homeless hippies. Comments also suggest that the unemployed and people on welfare, are lazy people taking advantage of the system. Tolerant? Not even close.
It would appear that many Fredericton residents don't know what the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is, or why we have it in place. Even more shocking is the inference that it shouldn't be used to protect a citizen who they personally may not 'like'. That type of ignorance coming from a community that has been listed at one of the 'top seven intelligent communities'. Sadly, the commentary coming out of the population hasn't sounded very intelligent at all.
I think the Mayor, everyone in city hall, including the police department, should invite the CCLA to visit and give them a course of civil liberties, how they apply to ALL Canadians, and why they need to be respected.
The argument has been taken to the public arena now, and it can only make the police department and city hall look more and more tyrannical and abusive. Libel chill has filled the air, and only a handful of people are ready and willing to speak out about it, I am one of those people.
I believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It's for me, and you. It's for my friends, my family, and my foes and naysayers. It's for the law abiding, and for the criminally convicted. It's for the rich, and the poor. It's for those with mental health issues, and for the scholars. It's for EVERYONE, and when citizens lightly make comments that the charter shouldn't protect 'some people', it shows the ignorance and complacency that has permeated our community.
I can only hope that some of the residents of Fredericton open their minds and eyes to what arresting someone using s.301 of the criminal code actually means, and why it should be removed from the criminal code. The CCLA believes that, and so many other powerful intelligent lawyers and professors around the country.
If the Fredericton Police Force, and the Crown, proceed with the actual charge of Criminal Libel under section 301 of the criminal code, the case will set a precedent to all of those facebook users who might hurl an insult via text online. Slander is spoken, libel is written, so the law states. People across the country could be hauled in to answer to a one line quote that hurt someone else's feelings. But, according to some residents in Fredericton, "lock them up and throw away the key". Clean streets and a zombie like population that knows better than to challenge or complain about anyone in authority. When we can't criticize and challenge the people we have elected, we cease to remain a free society.
Thursday, 9 February 2012
For the Love of Books and Freedom
“1984”, “Farenheit 451”, and “Animal Farm”
I read each of these publications when I was a young girl. At the time,
I thought that the concepts were interesting, but the idea that any or
all of them could affect me in any substantial way, was absurd. Today,
we find ourselves banning books, totalitarian regimes exist and are being
exposed for what they are, and Big Brother is watching.The world has become
smaller, and somewhat more scarier than I ever could have imagined.
The good news in all of this, is that while Big Brother is watching “us”,
we’ve evolved into a tech savvy generation, defiant about oppression,
and choose civil disobedience to try to shift the evil ways of the corporate
world and our governments. There is no turning back.Technology has made the
difference. Big Brother may be watching us, but we are also watching Big
Brother. In fact, I suggest “we the people” are watching big brother even
closer than ‘they’ could have ever imagined.
With cellular technology putting cameras and video recording devices at our fingertips, we have been empowered to not fall victim to the oppression. Instead, we choose to record it, take pictures of it, and expose it for what it really is. I used to be concerned about the “Big Brother” theory but now I think “Big Brother” should be concerned about us, and they are.
Governments are trying to figure out how to take away the power that we have been given via technology. Block facebook,block twitter, and attempt to use SOPA and ACTA to keep us down. We the people find our way around it, and help other people do the same. The Tor project is a perfect example, and it was developed by a Canadian Company, which makes me even more proud to support it.
In conclusion, I think ‘we the people’ have finally realized the importance of sending a message to the government and the greedy corporations, that we have become “Big Brother” and we are now watching YOU and we expect great things. In the words of Anonymous , “We are Anonymous, We are Legion , We do not forgive, We do not forget, Expect Us".
“Times, They are a Changing” Bob Dylan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)