litigator
Junior Member
The legal guy
Posts: 20
|
Post by litigator on Mar 8, 2007 9:24:32 GMT -5
We are all aware of the cruel and inhumane treatment that is doled out to parents in child protection matters. The best way to protect yourself from lies and malicious allegations is with a simple tape recorder. Any phone call or meeting with CAS should be recorded by you. The most important place to make use of this protection is in the courtroom. Section 136(2) of the Courts of Justice act grants all citizens the right to record their court proceedings. Section 136 reads as follows, 136. Subject to subsections (2) and (3), no person shall,
(a) take or attempt to take a photograph, motion picture, audio recording or other record capable of producing visual or aural representations by electronic means or otherwise,
(i) at a court hearing,
(ii) of any person entering or leaving the room in which a court hearing is to be or has been convened, or
(iii) of any person in the building in which a court hearing is to be or has been convened where there is reasonable ground for believing that the person is there for the purpose of attending or leaving the hearing;
(b) publish, broadcast, reproduce or otherwise disseminate a photograph, motion picture, audio recording or record taken in contravention of clause (a); or
(c) broadcast or reproduce an audio recording made as described in clause (2) (b). R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 136 (1).
Exceptions
(2) Nothing in subsection (1),
(a) prohibits a person from unobtrusively making handwritten notes or sketches at a court hearing; or
(b) prohibits a lawyer, a party acting in person or a journalist from unobtrusively making an audio recording at a court hearing, in the manner that has been approved by the judge, for the sole purpose of supplementing or replacing handwritten notes. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 136 (2); 1996, c. 25, s. 1 (22).
It is subsection 2(b) that is of particular interest to those at home.
I have all of the arguments one needs to successfully record their own court hearing. Contact me for details
|
|
rtmq
Full Member
visiting admin
Posts: 27
|
Post by rtmq on Mar 9, 2007 17:45:30 GMT -5
Litigator, your statement that the law allows a party to record court proceedings in Ontario is true but naive. The courts will leave no stone unturned to prevent you from exercising that right. Canada Court Watch reports that parties have been subjected to a body search on entering the courtroom, to remove recording devices. Persons insisting on their right to a recorder have been taken to a side room and roughed up. In the case of a girl with the pseudonym "Anne", documented at fixcas.com/oppose/anne/anne.htm , Canada Court Watch showed up at a case in Barrie in the role of journalist. The lawyers held a secret confab with the judge for over an hour, then adjourned the case for two weeks, to resume in another town, Collingwood. At that court appearance, judge Olah ordered the courtroom doors locked and stationed a cop outside to prevent Canada Courtwatch from even making a motion to the judge.
|
|
|
Post by td on Mar 9, 2007 18:05:37 GMT -5
justice in ontario-steve earl
|
|
|
Post by The jury duty on Mar 24, 2007 20:30:14 GMT -5
My jury duty expereince - this was a joke deserving that I drop my Canadian citizenship! In actual fact when I think about it as a foreign citizen I would be even more protected by the Canadian legal system. Having a third party in the game never hurts.
So to share my experience. We were 270 people called that day. The capacity of the waiting area is just about half of that. None of the meetings started on time - usually like 30 to 45 minutes late after the anounced time. There was time when people were made to wait standing for over an hour , even senior sitizens and disabled. There was no clerk around and even when I tried to file a written complaint I could not do so.
Next day I sit next to the court clerk when she was checking in the people. I did talk to her about the fact that it really does not make sense to have a prosedure to invite 270 people when they do not have capacity to accomodate them. She said this is an ongoing event , not a news in other words. I asked how to go about fixing it. She mentioned that I can write to the attorney general. Strange - in the court I could not find any complaint forms.
The process of selecting a jury is sloppy and made to discourage the public in participating in the judicial system. After hanging in court for 2 days .
Behavioral people felt lone and did not talk to each other. Well I talked to everybody. For exmple the detectivesrepresenting the crawn told me that in court is like that - waiting and waiting and waiting.
So for criminal trial there are 12 jurors and for civil trial there are 6 jurors. I find the jury system a great way to deal with the CAS, especially that an citizen can press private criminal charges. Now after I know how it works I firmly believe I can use ti to my advantage!
|
|
litigator
Junior Member
The legal guy
Posts: 20
|
Post by litigator on Mar 25, 2007 6:48:32 GMT -5
rtmq
As I am closely affiliated with the Canada Court Watch Program I doubt there is any info relating to Court Watch reports you could provide me that I am not already privy to. I would suggest that before you throw the word naive around you should probably do your homework friend. I am certainly aware of the actions of Justice Olah in Newmarket and recently Justice Waldman of the Ontario Court of Justice located at 47 Sheppard Ave in Toronto. Justice Waldman. On April 21 and June 5 2006, Justice Waldman refused a self represented litigant his right to record his proceedings. Madame Justice Waldman in her reasons for decision has applied a twisted interpretation of section 136 of the Courts of Justice Act in stating that the judge has the authority to refuse you your right to record. Section 136 of the Courts of Justice Act reads as follows,
Subject to subsections (2) and (3), no person shall,
(a) take or attempt to take a photograph, motion picture, audio recording or other record capable of producing visual or aural representations by electronic means or otherwise,
(i) at a court hearing,
(ii) of any person entering or leaving the room in which a court hearing is to be or has been convened, or
(iii) of any person in the building in which a court hearing is to be or has been convened where there is reasonable ground for believing that the person is there for the purpose of attending or leaving the hearing;
(b) publish, broadcast, reproduce or otherwise disseminate a photograph, motion picture, audio recording or record taken in contravention of clause (a); or
(c) broadcast or reproduce an audio recording made as described in clause (2) (b). R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 136 (1).
Exceptions
(2) Nothing in subsection (1),
(a) prohibits a person from unobtrusively making handwritten notes or sketches at a court hearing; or
(b) prohibits a lawyer, a party acting in person or a journalist from unobtrusively making an audio recording at a court hearing, in the manner that has been approved by the judge, for the sole purpose of supplementing or replacing handwritten notes. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 136 (2); 1996, c. 25, s. 1 (22).
If you read subsection 2 carefully you will see that the judge only has authority to deal with the manner in which the recording is made not the authority to refuse you that right. Yes peoples rights are being denied to them in our courts, what RTMQ is not aware of or chose not to post is that in the very same court in Barrie back in December a judge and prominent lawyer acknowledged in open court that a party does indeed have the right to record their own court hearings. Canada Court Watch was on hand for that hearing as well and have also made posts on their website about such. So while you have chosen to focus on the negative, you have failed to see that positive changes have occurred as well.
(Dec 20, 2006) Court Watch will be adding the names of the Honourable Mr. Justice Craig Perkins of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and Toronto Lawyer, Nicole Tellier to our growing list of legal professionals and judges who have publicly acknowledged that the citizens of Ontario have the right to record their own court hearing in a reasonable manner using their own recording device as lawfully permitted under Ontario's Court of Justice Act.
The citizens of Ontario can thank both Justice Perkins and Ms. Nicole Tellier of Toronto for showing their respect for this section of Ontario's Court of Justice Act in a recent court matter. Recording in the court is also supported by other prominent judges such as the Honourable Mr. Justice James MacPherson of the Court of Appeal of Ontario as well as a number of other well known professionals who were part of the Attorney General's Panel on Justice and the Media "The Panel recommends that Section 136 (2) (b) of the Courts of Justice Act by amended to permit the unobtrusive use of tape recorders at a court hearing without the prior approval of the judge"
You may find that it is a lot easier to exercise your rights if you keep up to date with the arguments to support your position such as other cases where people have been permitted with no hassle to record. The case of Justice Olah locking out the media was some time ago and since then there have been developments that will assist others with exercising their right to record in future. Instead of passing along misleading and discouraging information to the readers, I would urge you to exercise a little due diligence and make sure you are passing out helpful not harmful information.
|
|
|
Post by recording on Mar 25, 2007 7:38:02 GMT -5
Why make your life so difficult. If a recording inside the courtroom is quastiobale , then make the recording outside of the courtroom and put an end of the story .... there is a saying : "Walls have ears!"
|
|
rtmq
Full Member
visiting admin
Posts: 27
|
Post by rtmq on Mar 25, 2007 15:01:18 GMT -5
In response to my suggestion that the right to record your own court proceedings in Ontario was a sham Litigator wrote:
> I would suggest that before you throw the word naive > around you should probably do your homework friend. > > (snip) > > You may find that it is a lot easier to exercise your > rights if you keep up to date with the arguments to > support your position such as other cases where people > have been permitted with no hassle to record. The case of > Justice Olah locking out the media was some time ago and > since then there have been developments that will assist > others with exercising their right to record in future. > Instead of passing along misleading and discouraging > information to the readers, I would urge you to exercise a > little due diligence and make sure you are passing out > helpful not harmful information.
Litigator:
I hope you are right. Your citation of the law leaves me cold, since the courts defy the law in this area. I will be more convinced if you can cite cases of litigants allowed to record their own hearings without incident. Please send me their names, if you can.
Robert T McQuaid Mattawa Ontario
|
|