51141

thou shalt not kill

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby johnrae » Feb 14th, 2018, 1:26 pm

"You forgot to mention that the dead guy's own girlfriend wouldn't show up to the witness stand. Didn't care enough, or had something to hide? "

https://amp.reddit.com/r/canada/comment ... political/

2 people like this post.
johnrae
Fledgling
 
Posts: 116
Likes: 3 posts
Liked in: 130 posts
Joined: Sep 2nd, 2014, 11:30 am

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby johnrae » Feb 14th, 2018, 3:03 pm

[quote="Ken7"]Rob Feist, lawyer in North Battleford says this-

Gerald Stanley then claimed, holding the Tokarev in his right hand, he reached through the Boushie SUV’s driver side window with his left hand to try to turn off the ignition. (I encourage you to actually try this, on a vehicle, and think about why you would use your left hand to turn off a vehicle as opposed to switching hands and putting the firearm in your left. Motion it out. Using your left hand makes no sense, and is incredibly awkward.)

I am right handed, and when I reach through my truck window I will use my left hand to take the keys out every time. Its easier then trying to reach around the steering wheel.
johnrae
Fledgling
 
Posts: 116
Likes: 3 posts
Liked in: 130 posts
Joined: Sep 2nd, 2014, 11:30 am

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby Ken7 » Feb 14th, 2018, 3:06 pm

johnrae wrote:"You forgot to mention that the dead guy's own girlfriend wouldn't show up to the witness stand. Didn't care enough, or had something to hide? "

https://amp.reddit.com/r/canada/comment ... political/



Trudeau should be given a hard copy of this. Wonder what his thoughts would be, likely the same as he also supports ISIS.

featfan likes this post.
Ken7
Guru
 
Posts: 6152
Likes: 3292 posts
Liked in: 2232 posts
Joined: Sep 30th, 2007, 3:09 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby alanjh595 » Feb 14th, 2018, 3:14 pm

Not only that, to use your right arm, would force your body to turn your back on the assailant. Better to be able to see his face, and determine what he might do next.
We are splitting hairs here and acting as forensic analysis based upon only what has been read in newspapers and internet forums.
It doesn't matter what arm he used to take the keys. Whatever is argued in this forum makes one lick of difference to the outcome.
The drunk youths were determined to be wrong in their actions and the farmer was aquitted of the charges against him in a Canadian court of law.

2 people like this post.
User avatar
alanjh595
Grand Pooh-bah
 
Posts: 2458
Likes: 927 posts
Liked in: 1639 posts
Joined: Oct 20th, 2017, 4:18 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby vegas1500 » Feb 14th, 2018, 4:03 pm

johnrae wrote:"You forgot to mention that the dead guy's own girlfriend wouldn't show up to the witness stand. Didn't care enough, or had something to hide? "

https://amp.reddit.com/r/canada/comment ... political/


Cut her some slack, she’s moved on! [icon_lol2.gif] [icon_lol2.gif]

Snman likes this post.
User avatar
vegas1500
Generalissimo Postalot
 
Posts: 888
Likes: 2680 posts
Liked in: 1111 posts
Joined: Aug 4th, 2013, 5:53 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby Osoyoos_Familyof4 » Feb 14th, 2018, 4:19 pm

Why are you using Reddit comments as links like it's some remotely credible news source?

I have no idea whether the girlfriend was served a subpoena or not? Either way, this is left to lawyers and may even serve (as long as you're casting aspersions) further evidence of injustice, and I haven't quite decided in my own head yet how I feel about the verdict.

I do however believe there has been plenty of irregularities if we're discussing the way the evidence was handled and the family being treated badly.
Osoyoos_Familyof4
Board Meister
 
Posts: 555
Likes: 260 posts
Liked in: 498 posts
Joined: Nov 26th, 2013, 11:15 am

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby coffeeFreak » Feb 14th, 2018, 4:49 pm

Ken7 wrote:Part of the problem was, the Indiginous Jurors were making comments about how they would like to deal with the accused. This was brought into the court and therefore they were excluded. A juror has to be crossed by Defence and the Crown, if there is any reason to believe the individual will be bias there are dismissed. Both sides have that opportunity, it is that simple..


You are misinformed Ken7

Several Indigenous people were rejected by the defence during jury selection with what are called peremptory challenges.

“Peremptory challenges just are really asking lawyers to rely on their stereotypes about the person they see,” Jonathan Rudin, with Aboriginal Legal Services in Toronto, said....During jury selection, the Crown and defence are each given a set number of peremptory [in this case, 14] challenges and don’t have to give reasons for rejecting a potential juror. Lawyers can also “challenge for cause,” which involves a judge asking potential jurors pre-approved questions, including whether they may have a bias in the case."
https://country105.com/news/4016405/challenge-changes-jury-lists-indigenous-names-gerald-stanley-trial/
User avatar
coffeeFreak
Guru
 
Posts: 5150
Likes: 1022 posts
Liked in: 407 posts
Joined: Oct 22nd, 2009, 5:06 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby Jflem1983 » Feb 14th, 2018, 4:50 pm

coffeeFreak wrote:
Ken7 wrote:Part of the problem was, the Indiginous Jurors were making comments about how they would like to deal with the accused. This was brought into the court and therefore they were excluded. A juror has to be crossed by Defence and the Crown, if there is any reason to believe the individual will be bias there are dismissed. Both sides have that opportunity, it is that simple..


You are misinformed Ken7

Several Indigenous people were rejected by the defence during jury selection with what are called peremptory challenges.

“Peremptory challenges just are really asking lawyers to rely on their stereotypes about the person they see,” Jonathan Rudin, with Aboriginal Legal Services in Toronto, said....During jury selection, the Crown and defence are each given a set number of peremptory [in this case, 14] challenges and don’t have to give reasons for rejecting a potential juror. Lawyers can also “challenge for cause,” which involves a judge asking potential jurors pre-approved questions, including whether they may have a bias in the case."
https://country105.com/news/4016405/challenge-changes-jury-lists-indigenous-names-gerald-stanley-trial/



Most failed to show up . Was a half hour drive.
We don't reach for handouts we reach for those who are down . "Garth Brooks "

You have got to stand for something . Or you will fall for anything "Aaron Tippin"
MAKE ALBERTA GREAT AGAIN
User avatar
Jflem1983
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3071
Likes: 5476 posts
Liked in: 1747 posts
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2015, 10:38 am

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby Ken7 » Feb 14th, 2018, 5:51 pm

coffeeFreak wrote:
Ken7 wrote:Part of the problem was, the Indiginous Jurors were making comments about how they would like to deal with the accused. This was brought into the court and therefore they were excluded. A juror has to be crossed by Defence and the Crown, if there is any reason to believe the individual will be bias there are dismissed. Both sides have that opportunity, it is that simple..


You are misinformed Ken7

Several Indigenous people were rejected by the defence during jury selection with what are called peremptory challenges.

“Peremptory challenges just are really asking lawyers to rely on their stereotypes about the person they see,” Jonathan Rudin, with Aboriginal Legal Services in Toronto, said....During jury selection, the Crown and defence are each given a set number of peremptory [in this case, 14] challenges and don’t have to give reasons for rejecting a potential juror. Lawyers can also “challenge for cause,” which involves a judge asking potential jurors pre-approved questions, including whether they may have a bias in the case."
https://country105.com/news/4016405/challenge-changes-jury-lists-indigenous-names-gerald-stanley-trial/




Possibly read this article.

http://torontosun.com/news/national/mal ... 1518567489

It would appear I may not have been misinformed! Maybe you're just a little behind.


However, the reason there were no Aboriginal Canadians on the jury in this controversial case is because so many deliberately opted out of the process. Other First Nations prospective jurors, meanwhile, were openly and outwardly biased during the selection process, according to one prospective juror who spoke to the Sun.


“You could audibly hear some of them talking amongst themselves, discussing how they were going to hang Stanley, or they were going to make sure he gets hung, or that if they don’t get the results they want, that they were going to handle it themselves,” the person said of the Aboriginal people who remained. This account comes from one individual who spoke with the Sun, and has not yet been corroborated by other witnesses.


“The thing that was the most shocking to me was the fact that they were so audible from where I was sitting (across the room) and there were police scattered throughout the room. No one stopped them.


Freak do you think these INDIGINOUS would be unbiased or would you in your professional opinion want them on a Jury you were accused of Second Degree Murder of one of their people?
Last edited by Ken7 on Feb 14th, 2018, 5:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

vegas1500 likes this post.
Ken7
Guru
 
Posts: 6152
Likes: 3292 posts
Liked in: 2232 posts
Joined: Sep 30th, 2007, 3:09 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby Ken7 » Feb 14th, 2018, 5:56 pm

[quote="coffeeFreak"][/quote]

You are misinformed Ken7

[quote]

Do you have any idea how a Jury is selected? Stop in court some day and educate yourself.
Ken7
Guru
 
Posts: 6152
Likes: 3292 posts
Liked in: 2232 posts
Joined: Sep 30th, 2007, 3:09 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby coffeeFreak » Feb 14th, 2018, 6:31 pm

Ken7 wrote:Freak do you think these INDIGINOUS would be unbiased or would you in your professional opinion want them on a Jury you were accused of Second Degree Murder of one of their people?


Oh good Lord!! Yes, one anonymous person in the Sun article says it's so...Right! AND, I think you need to familiarise yourself with how a jury is selected in Criminal Court:


Peremptory challenge
The right of the accused or the Crown to object to a member of the jury array being chosen to serve on the jury, without being required to offer any explanation for the objection. The Crown and the accused each have a limited number of peremptory challenges, which varies with the offence charged: see section 634 of the Criminal Code.
https://www.irwinlaw.com/cold/peremptory_challenge
User avatar
coffeeFreak
Guru
 
Posts: 5150
Likes: 1022 posts
Liked in: 407 posts
Joined: Oct 22nd, 2009, 5:06 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby GordonH » Feb 14th, 2018, 6:39 pm

coffeeFreak wrote:
Several Indigenous people were rejected by the defence during jury selection with what are called peremptory challenges.


“Peremptory challenges just are really asking lawyers to rely on their stereotypes about the person they see,” Jonathan Rudin, with Aboriginal Legal Services in Toronto, said....During jury selection, the Crown and defence are each given a set number of peremptory [in this case, 14] challenges and don’t have to give reasons for rejecting a potential juror. Lawyers can also “challenge for cause,” which involves a judge asking potential jurors pre-approved questions, including whether they may have a bias in the case."
https://country105.com/news/4016405/challenge-changes-jury-lists-indigenous-names-gerald-stanley-trial/


So coffeeFreak what if any changes would you like to see in regards Peremptory Challenges.

Jflem1983 likes this post.
User avatar
GordonH
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 19142
Likes: 2027 posts
Liked in: 6405 posts
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 6:21 pm
Location: Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby Fancy » Feb 14th, 2018, 6:41 pm

However, the reason there were no Aboriginal Canadians on the jury in this controversial case is because so many deliberately opted out of the process
And that happens more than what people know about. Funny that it might make the news but every so briefly that it's forgotten about and buried in the internet.
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat

Ken7 likes this post.
User avatar
Fancy
The Pilgrim
 
Posts: 44440
Likes: 1094 posts
Liked in: 5488 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 5:23 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby coffeeFreak » Feb 14th, 2018, 6:57 pm

GordonH wrote:So coffeeFreak what if any changes would you like to see in regards Peremptory Challenges.


I really don't think race or gender should be accepted for the use of this challenge, but other than that, I am unsure.

Here's an interesting article regarding this issue.

What you need to know about juries, challenges and potential reforms

JOE FRIESEN AND SEAN FINE
PUBLISHED 2 DAYS AGO

The jury is known as the conscience of the community. Yet, when white Saskatchewan farmer Gerald Stanley went on trial on a charge of second-degree murder in the shooting death of Colten Boushie, who was Cree, the community wasn't fully represented; Indigenous people were seemingly excluded. In these circumstances, could a jury assembled this way serve effectively as a conscience? Amid calls for reform of the jury system, here is what you need to know about challenges, juries and the possibility of change.

How did it happen that Indigenous people were excluded from the jury?

Jury selection for Mr. Stanley's trial began with a pool of names randomly selected from Ministry of Health records, considered a fair basis for selection since nearly everyone has a health card. About 175 people came to court in Battleford, Sask., on Jan. 29. When the Chief Justice asked whether any had a valid reason not to be part of the jury, nearly 70 stood up and about 50 were allowed to go home, citing reasons such as poor hearing or failing health. The remaining names were placed in a drum and drawn at random. Neither Crown nor defence was given any information about the potential jurors except what they could discern from their appearance. Both sides used what are called peremptory challenges to block potential jurors. In this case, each side had 14 such challenges, which don't need to be justified or explained. The defence blocked all the jurors who appeared to be Indigenous, whether young or old, male or female, which upset Mr. Boushie's family. The defence also blocked people who did not appear to be Indigenous. Of course, it's difficult to know precisely a person's ethnic background purely from their appearance, but at least five challenges involved people who appeared to be First Nations. The Crown used fewer challenges, all on people who did not appear to be Indigenous.

Did the Crown challenge it at the time?

The Crown did not raise any objection during this process, nor did Chief Justice Martel Popescul.

Is there a possible ground of appeal here?

A discriminatory use of peremptory challenges could be a reason to reconsider the jury verdict, says Nader Hasan, a Toronto lawyer specializing in criminal and constitutional law. But the lack of a Crown challenge at the time makes it more difficult. "Sometimes, the courts of appeal will say, 'If you didn't raise it in the court below, you can't raise it for the first time here.'"

Has Canada considered eliminating peremptory challenges, as they've done in the United Kingdom?

The Aboriginal Justice Inquiry (AJI) in Manitoba in 1991 found that it seemed to be common for some Crown and defence counsel to exclude Indigenous jurors by using peremptory challenges. One of its recommendations was that peremptory challenges be eliminated, although it was not acted on. The peremptory challenge was described by the Law Reform Commission in 1980 as a tool that means the accused has "some minimal control over the makeup of the jury and can eliminate persons for whatever reason, no matter how illogical or irrational," but the AJI found it has "undesirable effects on the racial makeup of jury panels." In his 2013 report on First Nations representation on Ontario juries, former Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci recommended discussing the possibility of asking the federal government to amend the Criminal Code to prevent the use of peremptory challenges to discriminate against First Nations people.

If our system trusts jurors to decide cases based on what they hear in the courtroom, why does it matter who is on the jury?

The roots of the modern jury stem from 14th-century England; juries were an attempt to entrench the rule of law by reducing the control exercised by political and economic elites, according to John Whyte, a former deputy attorney-general in the Saskatchewan government. Even after judicial independence became an important feature of English law in the 18th century, juries were still seen as important in ensuring that justice is a reflection of local understanding and norms.

"Juries are conversations and conversations take a track," Mr. Whyte said. "The question is how narrow a track, how open a track. I think it's a problem when you don't allow those conversations to have the experience of a diverse representation. Juries ultimately have to give one side the benefit of its doubt."

What about the United States? Didn't their courts get rid of race-based use of peremptory challenges? Why can't our courts do the same?

In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the prosecution must not use its peremptory challenges to reject potential jurors because of their race. That created the "Batson challenge" – defence lawyers may speak up when they see apparent race-based rejections, and the prosecution may be called on for an explanation. There are even "reverse Batson challenges" when the defence attempts the same. In Canada, defence lawyers have challenged the Crown's allegedly discriminatory use of peremptory challenges. In one case, a Superior Court judge in Ontario said in 1999 that neither the Crown nor the defence may use its peremptory challenges in a discriminatory way. The Supreme Court of Canada has not ruled specifically on the issue, but Mr. Iacobucci, reached on Monday, said the discriminatory use of peremptory challenges "should be equally prohibited here."

What are some drawbacks of eliminating peremptory challenges?

Jury selection could take longer, in that prosecutors and defence lawyers would use more "challenges for cause" to speak directly to potential jurors. And defence and Crown lawyers would lose an important tool. It might be that they have an instinct to avoid an individual. Or they might be concerned about the angry rhetoric prevalent in Saskatchewan before the Stanley trial, said Aaron Fox, a criminal lawyer in Regina. "The Crown has a legitimate concern: There's some people out there who have been sending out hateful, racist comments. You obviously want to make sure you don't have anyone like that on the jury. On the other hand, you've got activists saying First Nations people aren't going to get a fair trial. From a defence perspective, you're scared you're going to get someone like that on the jury."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/what-you-need-to-know-about-juries-challenges-and-potential-reforms/article37957170/
User avatar
coffeeFreak
Guru
 
Posts: 5150
Likes: 1022 posts
Liked in: 407 posts
Joined: Oct 22nd, 2009, 5:06 pm

Re: thou shalt not kill

Postby Fancy » Feb 14th, 2018, 7:00 pm

coffeeFreak wrote:I really don't think race or gender should be accepted for the use of this challenge

I see/hear/etc. this every day but why do entertain the concept to start with? That has to stop.
Fancy this, Fancy that and by the way, T*t for Tat
User avatar
Fancy
The Pilgrim
 
Posts: 44440
Likes: 1094 posts
Liked in: 5488 posts
Joined: Apr 15th, 2006, 5:23 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canada

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: justincase, OldIslander and 6 guests