I always used to take their pictures and I forgot their first name...I was told today that therese died last year...now they are both gone...yes...life is a VERY short ride...:(
Over the years, I always took pictures of these ladies.
They seem to take good pictures together.
I haven't saw them all summer long so I believe they were dead!!!
But there they were a couple of weeks ago sitting on a bench enjoying a good day of Indian Summer!!
I decided to do a little interview!!!
Click below -
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2n2tcHCmAM&fs=1&hl=en_US]
So? She dearly misses Father Brien?
He showed up to my place last Friday ..:(
I showed Father Brien the video and away we went!!!
We located the old lady and she sure was a happy lady!!!
Look at all the puzzles???? She sure has more patience than this Blogger!!!
This was the hardest one I guess?
I made an old Lady very happy so therefore that made my day!!!
:)
First of all Charles it is a set up by he leaders of fredericton as a pure harassment.
Being prosecuted by organized evil means you are doing some good for the people.
I believe if you have a good judge not influenced the case will be kicked out and hopefully the judge orders such harassment against you stopped or else.
You can believe it is based on lawyers but it is not. Everyone in NB or I should say the good people of NB knows it is a harassment case from your good friends not only in the police force but leaders above them. How high this case will tell.
If found guilty it means you are right the justice system is manure and I mean pig manure smell.
If only some evil leaders then the case will be closed and God allowed you justice for a change. My bet is the judge will be an honest judge and your case may show more people how we need balance.
For sure your case stinks as poor judgement on the prosecution or pure harassment.
Relax and have fun seeing evil in action. Remember the more they do to you the more heat they will have when they all land in he'll.
Have a great weekend Charles justice will prevail if not here then after life.
Guilty, not guilty; break the law, not break the law. That is not the issue here; the problem is that is that if you are a New Brunswicker and you are charged with a summary charge and cannot afford a lawyer the likelihood of successfully defending yourself is highly remote. Those who can afford legal representation are the ones who are most likely to present legally sound arguments in to the courts and the courts will come to a decision based on the facts and the arguments presented.
The lesson that is learned from Charles Leblanc is that our system inadvertently discriminate between those who are fortunate to afford representation and those who are unfortunate and cannot hire a lawyer.
What available options are there for those who can not afford a lawyer. One option is to plead guilty and forfeit any defenses that might be available to the person. After pleading guilty the person is at the mercy of the court for sentencing. The other option is to self-represent.
The moment one self-represents they are at a disadvantage because they don’t know the rules of the game, additionally don’t know how the game is played. How can they best represent themselves when they have to argue against a prosecutor who is well experience with court procedures and knows how to present legally sound arguments to persuade the judge to agree with the prosecution. While the onus is on the crown to find someone guilty, it is the defenses’ responsibility to counter the prosecution claim, but in order for the defense to do that they have to have the legal tools to do so.
Without money how can the defendant pay for legal document which may be contained within those documents information to help the defence's legal arguement. According to Charles, the clerk told him the cost for him to have his transcripts would be $400 which he cannot pay for, in essence the court refused because of affordability the transcript which could provide information crucial of his defence.
Our legislators need to address this inequality in the administration of justice so that everyone criminal or civil is on the same playing field regardless to affordability.
The key argument to why legal aid will not supply legal representation for summary conviction because of the costs to provide a lawyer to every financially disadvantage person. But in the long term, the cost to the taxpayer may be greater with self-representation, then if a lawyer was supplied to the accused on the onset.
Dennis Oland accused of killing his father has not spent one day in jail, while many with similar charges where held in custody upon being charge. The difference is Oland has the resources to purchase the talents of Canada’s best legal minds to come to his aid.
He reminded me that I believe he was a woman on a Blog.
It quickly came to my mind...I grabbed him < softly > and said - Heyyyy?? We're at the right place...the Gay Pride Parade!!!...Let me take a picture!!...lol
This is the picture...his name is right below the picture...sigghhh...I guess I didn't have glasses in those days...:(..
What do you think??? Didn't he look like a female???
Lieutenant-Governor of New Brunswick, Ms. Jocelyne Roy Vienneau;
On July 26, 2015, Citizen's Action Team sent a letter to Minister of Official Languages, Donald Arseneault, as well as to Premier Brian Gallant demanding the removal of Ms. Katherine d'Entremont from her position as Commissioner of Official Languages for New Brunswick.
We cited the following reasons for this demand:
· Recent public allegations have been made that Ms. d'Entremont was personally involved in a complaint made to her own office that resulted in the attempted termination and ultimate transfer of a Fredericton Commissionaire for his failure to speak French despite his offer to immediately get a Bilingual individual to provide service in French.
· May we point out that according to 2011 Statistics Canada information, the demographics of Fredericton are:
• 75.6% English only
• 23.6% Bilingual (French and English)
• 0.5% French only
• 0.3% Other
· Loss of confidence and respect by the public. Its widely felt that Ms. d'Entremont does not act within the mandate of her role to protect and promote both official languages, but that she is heavily biased towards representing only the Francophone communities and it is felt that this bias has been publicly demonstrated numerous times.
· A publicly demonstrated lack of respect and outright scorn towards the Anglophone population.
· An overly harsh and unreasonable approach towards applying the Official Languages Act that exceeds legal requirements and breeches Chartered Rights.
One day later, on July 27, 2015 - Minister Donald Arseneault publicly stated his refusal to consider her removal and did so without addressing the concerns brought forward.
At the very least - the allegations of misconduct require a thorough and public investigation.
We have been given to understand in response from our elected officials that it is in fact yourself who would make these decisions, and therefore we lay the matter before you with the expectation that it will be addressed.
When we think of police shootings, we immediately think of State Police killing black civilians. As Canadians, we view the actions of American police shooting American blacks when the office life or health was not in immediate danger as unjustifiable.
In Canada we have a similar situation with our police officers, whether RCMP, provincial or municipal police. Police killing civilians who pose no immediate threat to the offers life or health appear to be a common occurrence here in Canada. While the numbers are significantly lower in Canada then they are in the United States, when you make a population comparison between United States and Canada the numbers are high when you look at the number of civilians killed by police per capita.
There are undoubtedly situations that police officers find themselves that have no other options available but to critically injure the person. In these situations, it is justifiable to take a human life.
There is a plethora of Canadian case law that defines what the criteria are for using self-defence as a defence.
"If you had a reasonable belief this person will seriously hurt you, then you can justify killing them," you also would have to be in a situation where "if you don’t do something you're going to be seriously hurt or killed."
It appears that there are two different standards that are applied to what constitute justifiable homicide for the police, and the other what constitute justifiable homicide for the layman. For the police officer the only requirement is that all situations have the potential of serious injury or death may result. That is enough for the police to justify killing a civilian. The layman on the other hand the situation has to be more than just potential, it has to be based on the balance of probability that injury to self or death is highly probable if lethal action is not taken.
Over the years, I always took pictures of these ladies.
They seem to take good pictures together.
I haven't saw them all summer long so I believe they were dead!!!
But there they were a couple of weeks ago sitting on a bench enjoying a good day of Indian Summer!!
I decided to do a little interview!!!
Click below -
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2n2tcHCmAM&fs=1&hl=en_US]
So? She dearly misses Father Brien?
He showed up to my place last Friday ..:(
I showed Father Brien the video and away we went!!!
We located the old lady and she sure was a happy lady!!!
Look at all the puzzles???? She sure has more patience than this Blogger!!!
This was the hardest one I guess?
I made an old Lady very happy so therefore that made my day!!!
:)
