Off Topic

Conservatives accuse Trudeau of political interference in Canada's justice system

  • Last Updated:
  • Feb 21st, 2018 9:33 pm
Deal Expert
User avatar
Feb 9, 2003
16710 posts
1927 upvotes
Langley
Crazy that people seem to want Native juries in cases like this to ensure white people go to jail.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 17, 2009
1626 posts
496 upvotes
I do not know if it is a baseless rumor or if there is actually truth to it. Somebody on facebook commented on a G&M article that there were indigenous people that were screened as possible jurors for the Stanley trial. Apparently, the ones that did show up were wearing "Justice for Colten" shirts. They were disqualified, immediately.

Again, I do not know if this is true or not. If it was true, then electing those aboriginals as jurors would have been a terrible miscarriage of justice, as arguably the jurors would have not been neutral, at all.
Corvus oculum corvi non eruit.
Banned
Dec 22, 2017
322 posts
121 upvotes
Are these the same conservatives who use taxpayer money to keep sending me material on their criticism of supreme Court ruling on Khadar?
Penalty Box
User avatar
Mar 20, 2009
1285 posts
185 upvotes
Toronto
MTommy wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 9:56 am
You tell me. Seems to me a lot of things happening up there.
Sure.... I'll tell you a few things - but it will be from my mind. Winking Face

Firstly, my impression is that several mods here have an axe to grind with JT.
I can't help but wonder how much this bias helps shape things here.
Not a major issue, but worth mentioning.

Don't get me wrong - I understand that it is our civic duty to criticize and question government.
As they say, the weight of the crown is heavy, no matter who wears it.

With that said, I am highly suspicious about the motivations from some commenters.
If I had to guess, I suspect his major critics are all average/unattractive men who are both intimidated and resentful towards his good looks and charm. Based on the words they use to express their rage, I have no doubt that JT's intelligence exceeds theirs significantly. He's nowhere near the equal of his father when it comes to brains, but he certainly is not dumb. Underestimating JT is a foolish mistake.

I'm not a big fan of social media and selfies, but I recognize that others see value in this.
He engages with people, and they like him for it.
Worth mentioning that Rob Ford was also a selfie magnet.

During the Harper years, I thought nothing was more annoying than the predictable fearmongering attacks from the left. The JT hate (notwithstanding few intelligent observations) is cartoonist at best. Many seem to do it because it is easier to use a dim witted catch phrase than discuss the specifics at hand.

I have zero problems with his comments on this matter. He clearly specified he was not weighing in on the legal aspects of the case. If the only way that people can grasp this is to label it "virtue signalling", i think it speaks more of their indoctrination and limited scope of imagination.
Banned
Dec 22, 2017
322 posts
121 upvotes
shikotee wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 12:05 pm
Sure.... I'll tell you a few things - but it will be from my mind. Winking Face

Firstly, my impression is that several mods here have an axe to grind with JT.
I can't help but wonder how much this bias helps shape things here.
Not a major issue, but worth mentioning.

Don't get me wrong - I understand that it is our civic duty to criticize and question government.
As they say, the weight of the crown is heavy, no matter who wears it.

With that said, I am highly suspicious about the motivations from some commenters.
If I had to guess, I suspect his major critics are all average/unattractive men who are both intimidated and resentful towards his good looks and charm. Based on the words they use to express their rage, I have no doubt that JT's intelligence exceeds theirs significantly. He's nowhere near the equal of his father when it comes to brains, but he certainly is not dumb. Underestimating JT is a foolish mistake.

I'm not a big fan of social media and selfies, but I recognize that others see value in this.
He engages with people, and they like him for it.
Worth mentioning that Rob Ford was also a selfie magnet.

During the Harper years, I thought nothing was more annoying than the predictable fearmongering attacks from the left. The JT hate (notwithstanding few intelligent observations) is cartoonist at best. Many seem to do it because it is easier to use a dim witted catch phrase than discuss the specifics at hand.

I have zero problems with his comments on this matter. He clearly specified he was not weighing in on the legal aspects of the case. If the only way that people can grasp this is to label it "virtue signalling", i think it speaks more of their indoctrination and limited scope of imagination.
Its because the incels subreddit was banned so they post here more often
Deal Addict
Jan 17, 2012
3367 posts
90 upvotes
Toronto
TrafficEng wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 12:05 pm
Are these the same conservatives who use taxpayer money to keep sending me material on their criticism of supreme Court ruling on Khadar?
Do they criticize the supreme Court ruling or Trudeau payout to Khadr? Either way, not the same since khadrs case involved the government and the Cons are part of it...
Deal Addict
Oct 6, 2015
1300 posts
684 upvotes
I was never a fan of most politicians, especially PMs, being lawyers, or basically taking every last little bit of advice from lawyers instead of using some common sense. But this is a prime example (no pun intended) where the Prime Minister should have listened to the lawyers.

If there's any Appeal, now Gerald Stanley can make a pretty solid argument that the entire justice system is tainted.
Deal Addict
Jul 13, 2012
3185 posts
351 upvotes
Ottawa
Perhaps this is a good reason why these types of cases should be heard by a judge (or panel of judges) instead of a jury..
Moderator
User avatar
Dec 7, 2007
4826 posts
17823 upvotes
Toronto
shikotee wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 12:05 pm
Sure.... I'll tell you a few things - but it will be from my mind. Winking Face

Firstly, my impression is that several mods here have an axe to grind with JT.
I can't help but wonder how much this bias helps shape things here.
Not a major issue, but worth mentioning.

Don't get me wrong - I understand that it is our civic duty to criticize and question government.
As they say, the weight of the crown is heavy, no matter who wears it.

With that said, I am highly suspicious about the motivations from some commenters.
If I had to guess, I suspect his major critics are all average/unattractive men who are both intimidated and resentful towards his good looks and charm. Based on the words they use to express their rage, I have no doubt that JT's intelligence exceeds theirs significantly. He's nowhere near the equal of his father when it comes to brains, but he certainly is not dumb. Underestimating JT is a foolish mistake.

I'm not a big fan of social media and selfies, but I recognize that others see value in this.
He engages with people, and they like him for it.
Worth mentioning that Rob Ford was also a selfie magnet.

During the Harper years, I thought nothing was more annoying than the predictable fearmongering attacks from the left. The JT hate (notwithstanding few intelligent observations) is cartoonist at best. Many seem to do it because it is easier to use a dim witted catch phrase than discuss the specifics at hand.

I have zero problems with his comments on this matter. He clearly specified he was not weighing in on the legal aspects of the case. If the only way that people can grasp this is to label it "virtue signalling", i think it speaks more of their indoctrination and limited scope of imagination.
Bolded what I think it's a fair statement and appreciate your take on it, the rest above it is pure bologna. ;)
Deal Addict
Jan 2, 2005
4796 posts
560 upvotes
shikotee wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 12:05 pm
Firstly, my impression is that several mods here have an axe to grind with JT.
I can't help but wonder how much this bias helps shape things here.
Not a major issue, but worth mentioning.

Don't get me wrong - I understand that it is our civic duty to criticize and question government.
As they say, the weight of the crown is heavy, no matter who wears it.

With that said, I am highly suspicious about the motivations from some commenters.
If I had to guess, I suspect his major critics are all average/unattractive men who are both intimidated and resentful towards his good looks and charm. Based on the words they use to express their rage, I have no doubt that JT's intelligence exceeds theirs significantly. He's nowhere near the equal of his father when it comes to brains, but he certainly is not dumb. Underestimating JT is a foolish mistake.
Lol his major supporters are all average/unattractive men who are both in love and aroused towards his good looks and charm plus they are really, really, dumb. :rolleyes:
Deal Fanatic
Jul 5, 2005
6539 posts
239 upvotes
tk1000 wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 7:41 am
Did Stanley and his family go to Ottawa and scheduled a meeting with him and other cabinet ministers?
He wasn't invited via sympathetic tweet so I don't know why he'd make the trip...

ConsoleWatcher wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 12:43 pm
Perhaps this is a good reason why these types of cases should be heard by a judge (or panel of judges) instead of a jury..
Yeah, because the ethnicity of the judges wouldn't be brought into question when they decide in favour of Stanley...


Also, everyone points out that the jury wasn't diverse. Do we know that for sure? The family commented that it was an "all white" jury and the media has run with it. The media isn't supposed to comment on the jury so they're really just repeating the comments made by the family.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 7, 2012
30380 posts
7493 upvotes
GTHA
hugh_da_man wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 1:56 pm
He wasn't invited via sympathetic tweet so I don't know why he'd make the trip
Boushie family were not invited. They went to Ottawa to talk about the case with federal cabinet ministers and setup a meeting thru the prime ministers office.

Tootoosis and other family members are in Ottawa to talk about the case with members of the federal Liberal cabinet, including Indigenous Affairs Minister Carolyn Bennett.

She says she wants to see the government do away with so-called peremptory challenges, which allow lawyers to reject jury candidates without needing to provide a justification.


from https://globalnews.ca/news/4020304/colt ... ministers/
Moderator
User avatar
Dec 7, 2007
4826 posts
17823 upvotes
Toronto
hugh_da_man wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 1:56 pm
He wasn't invited via sympathetic tweet so I don't know why he'd make the trip...




Yeah, because the ethnicity of the judges wouldn't be brought into question when they decide in favour of Stanley...


Also, everyone points out that the jury wasn't diverse. Do we know that for sure? The family commented that it was an "all white" jury and the media has run with it. The media isn't supposed to comment on the jury so they're really just repeating the comments made by the family.
Who else is living out there? Only whites and natives?
Deal Fanatic
Apr 8, 2013
8087 posts
279 upvotes
i6s1 wrote:
Feb 13th, 2018 11:58 am
Crazy that people seem to want Native juries in cases like this to ensure white people go to jail.
Whats crazy is that you think an all white jury is the best way to have a fair trial.

Not one minority. Not even one aboriginal. JUST ALL WHITE. This is what you consider fair. LOL.

This is exactly why things need to change.

The entitlement is just mindblowing. That is why I will vote for the liberals again and again and again.
#Torontostrong
Diversity Is Our Strength 😎

Top