Self-representation more costly to taxpayer than cost of Legal Aid lawyer

P.S. THE IRVING REFUSE TO PRINT THIS STORY!!!! THE IRVING MEDIA REFUSE TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE!!! WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM A PAPER WHO BRAINWASH THE PUBLIC WITH FALSE STORIES??? IRVING PRAVDA????

by André Faust

Abraham Lincoln had it right when he said "He who represents himself has a fool for a client".

Given a choice, most persons accused of a crime would prefer a lawyer represent them in court. But not everyone has a choice. The poor are denied access to justice when they cannot afford to pay legal fees of $125 per/hour or more. And when they turn to New Brunswick Legal Aid for help with summary offenses such as assault, they are refused.

Where a middle-class or wealthy person hires a lawyer to stickhandle the same offense through the system, a poor person has to defend herself or plead guilty. If she challenges the system, she ends up representing herself in court - becoming "the fool" of Abe Lincoln's legal maxim.

As a result, we see a growing number of low-income, self-represented litigants and accused who have become a standard feature in New Brunswick 's civil and criminal courts.

According to the Canadian Bar Association, the cost of self-representation is expensive to both the accused and the taxpayer. The self-represented consume significantly more court time and resources than those with legal representation and they lose more often than they win.

The Charles Leblanc case is a glaring example of Legal Aid's abject failure to help low-income persons make their way through the justice system. It also shows that self-representation costs considerably more to the taxpayer than a Legal Aid lawyer.

In January, the controversial blogger was charged with the summary offence of assault, an accusation he vigorously denies. LeBlanc has been diagnosed with ADHD and epilepsy and receives a monthly income assistance cheque of $576. He lives in subsidized housing and cannot afford a lawyer. He applied twice for Legal Aid but was refused. If found guilty, LeBlanc could go to jail, lose his apartment and become homeless.

Given the circumstances, LeBlanc believes he has no choice but to represent himself in court. A group called "Friends For Justice" has set up a website http://charlesleblancdefencefund.com/ and raised more than $1100 with a goal of $5000 to pay for a lawyer and give LeBlanc a legal defence. Until then, however, LeBlanc continues to have a "fool for a client", as Abe Lincoln would say.

Leblanc’s first court appearance as a self-represented accused was on January 19 before Justice Julian Dickson. Since, then, he has appeared five more times before Justice Mary Jane Richards and Justice Brian McLean along with Special Crown Prosecutor Sebastien Michaud, who has been brought in from Edmundston.

Two recent hearings on July 7 and August 26 took 12 hours, the last one to question two members of the Miramichi Police Force who received the original assault complaint at the request of the Fredericton City Police. These two officers have travelled to Fredericton at least nine times on taxpayers' expense, perhaps more.

The next court date is Friday, September 18, at which time two Fredericton police officers will be cross examined by LeBlanc. Anyone who has sat in on the proceedings would agree it is painful to watch LeBlanc struggle with complex legal processes while begging the judge to appoint a Legal Aid lawyer. If previous hearings are any indication, the next session will be at least eight hours. And if the case goes to trial, it could be very lengthy with LeBlanc representing himself.

The costs to the taxpayer are surely in the tens of thousands of dollars by now and there is no end in sight, but what is an accused to do if he believes he is innocent? Ironically, had a Legal Aid lawyer argued LeBlanc's case from the beginning, this would have been resolved months ago, and the cost to the taxpayer would have been significantly reduced.

The problem is that policies making civil and criminal Legal Aid available for the working poor, seniors, students and those on income assistance are at the bottom of the priority list across Canada . The common denominator seems to be costs. Accessibility to Legal Aid is a budgetary matter and budgets determines one's eligibility, not justice.

Justice Minister Stephen Horseman must order changes to Legal Aid that will make it easier for New Brunswickers to qualify for assistance and get the necessary representation to resolve their legal issues.

If not, we will have more poor people tying up the courts and costing the taxpayer tens of thousands of dollars for cases that could be resolved quickly and easily with a Legal Aid lawyer.

---

Lots of people with mental issues on the street in Fredericton...:(

I don't know if it's because I haven't been in the City for a week but this morning while at King's Place, I noticed many people with mental issues...some I haven't seen for a while.

I might add the Police Scanner was VERY busy last night with issues of mental illness.

As a matter of face someone believe to have jumped off the Westmorland Bridge.

So??? What's going on anyway????..Cutbacks????

Or this???

One of these 4 people IS NOT a Journalist!!!! WHICH ONE???

The Good old days when Don MacPherson was a Journalist!!!!

Racist City of Fredericton is showing a poor image to the Tourists!!!!

No wonder Tourists are lost in Fredericton.....

Stephen Harper leaves Fredericton!!!

Tom Beaver says Canadian Legion should not get into Politics!!!

Low life non educated Racist Redneck views on Sports!!!

Oromocto Flats is the place to go for a bike ride!!!!!

Enjoying the first days of Fall 2015!!!!

Why would the citizens in Fredericton vote for Keith Ashfield???

You must be a believer....

Charles,

A believer??? Ya damn well BETTER be a believer, pal. The owner of this damn place knows EXACTLY what you're up to all the time. And as I watched, with great interest, the activities of Pope Francis during his visit to North America this past week, THE one constant that I could never get out of my mind, was that after the Pope's visit comes to a close, the Great Creator Himself, may just decide to put in another appearance. Because, hell man, He did it once, and if He so choses, HE'LL DAMN WELL DO IT AGAIN!!!! And for all you sadsack, loudmouth, fat-ass welfare bums out there, the God who gave you life will do WHATEVER HE DAMN WELL WANTS TO DO, WHENEVER HE DAMN WELL WANTS TO DO IT!!!! COMPRENDE??? And as we all know, the owner of the RMS TITANIC, when asked how unsinkable the ship was, stated emphatically and without hesitation, THE LORD HIMSELF CAN'T SINK THIS SHIP!!!! Amen and amen to that, my friend.

LUV YA BOOBIE!!!!

Racist City of Fredericton are leading the way in Jailing free speech!!!!

First they accused me to be a pedophile and then they had my Blog shut down!!!!

WE must replace the whole council < except for one > during the next Municipal Election!!!

A message to my idiot coward Jerkface!!! Mayor Brad Woodside Family members are off limit!!!!

Lately, I noticed people are trying to leave comments against Brad Woodside's family members!!!

Sorry but these members are not to be talk about in this Blog!!! They are off limit!!!

Now? If you wish to call the Mayor - A Racist, bigot, smoking, snobby and non educated person? That's ok but he called me the same names. My God...I forgot the word - Pedophile.....anyway...I hope I made myself VERY clear....:)
r/>

I haven't seen the preacher all summer...is he still alive???

Lord??? Why do we bitch and complain? We have our health!!!

Summary Charges: a fast track to trial and conviction – access to justice irrelevant.

Charles LeBlanc has repeatedly asked the Fredericton court reporter, Don MacPherson, to write an article on the injustices of summary charge prosecutions. Charles has learned, the hard way, that summary charge process is little more than a fast track to trial and conviction – unless you know the law better than a lawyer. Even then judges argue on behalf of the Crown and protect dirty cops.

Just before his hearing, on 18th September, 2015, Charles asked MacPherson (yet again) to write an informative article on the disaster that is summary charge prosecution. In response the court reporter stormed out of the hearing, saying Charles obviously didn’t want him there. Nothing could have been farther from the truth.

Don MacPherson has said many times his job is only to report what he hears and sees; he does not investigate or pass opinion. The trouble is what he hears and sees is not always what is reported. MacPherson also lectures people for attacking his “journalistic integrity”. I think his article, published on 21 September, tells us exactly where his journalistic integrity lies. Even though he did not “see” or “hear” anything of Charles’s hearing (having left in a tantrum) he still wrote an article as the court reporter. His short article was full of errors and misinformation, including a false and defamatory headline, saying Charles was going to trial for assaulting a police officer. Better to write nothing at all than to misinform the public and defame someone.

The Irving press clearly has no interest in educating the public, exposing systemic abuse or improving quality of life in this province. It is actively suppressing systemic wrongdoing and the court reporter seems to be one of Irving’s instruments. Since the Irving press won’t write the article I will. The public needs to know.

There are two levels of criminal offence in Canada: summary and indictable. Summary is less serious and the chosen route for most complaints. Depending on the offence, a summary conviction can result in up to 6 – 18 months incarceration and/or fines up to $5,000. It is still a very serious matter, negatively impacting reputations as well as Charter rights to liberty, security and equality – sometimes even life, as we saw with the tragic outcome of RCMP Corporal Ron Francis’s ridiculous charges and prosecution.

Under the Criminal Code of Canada the Federal Government has set up a two-tier system for laying, prosecuting and trying the two levels of charge. The differences create a huge disconnect for access to justice. Those charged with indictable offences have far more access to court process that may prevent a charge from proceeding to trial, assuming the accused know their rights, or have a competent lawyer (both of which are rare as the yeti).

Both types of charge are usually laid in provincial court by police officers who swear an “Information” before a judge. However, for more serious indictable offences, the Crown can prefer an indictment, submitted directly to the Superior court, which is not so common.

What are the big differences between summary and indictable criminal process? When indictable charges are presented to a court the judge is required to review the grounds and evidence before accepting it. This may require a hearing, held without the public or accused allowed, so I doubt that happens very often.

After entering a plea those accused of indictable offences can choose to be tried by one of the following: a provincial court judge; a Superior Court judge; a Superior Court judge and jury. The defence can also request a preliminary inquiry, which is a hearing to decide if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial. There are no such luxuries provided for summary offence prosecutions.

When a summary charge is laid judges are under no obligation to review any evidence or grounds. There is no right to a preliminary inquiry and no right to elect if the trial will be in provincial or superior court, or by judge and jury.

The Criminal Code also does not allow appeals from interim judicial decisions – however appalling – until the accused has been convicted and/or sentenced. In short, the criminal justice system is designed to fail defendants. There seems to be a nationwide agenda to use summary charges to fast-track people to trial, which almost always results in the Crown winning a conviction, based on little to no evidence and police officers “testilying”. (“Testilying” is the act of police lying on the witness stand – yes, it is so common it even has a name.

As we all now know, Legal Aid Services New Brunswick is withdrawing even basic services. Many people facing jail for a summary charge are not represented. Summary trials seem designed to convict people as quickly as possible. I heard a Fredericton Provincial Court judge say her trials average 30 minutes.

So, why is our criminal justice system such a disaster? First, I think this province has very few real jobs. Zero growth in business and industry and a contracting job market means the government has to preserve a facade that we need lots of police, judges, sheriffs, court staff, jails and their employees and Crown prosecutors. Without those jobs this province would be in an even bigger economic crisis than it is already in.
And let’s not forget the other winners in a prosecution: defence lawyers. Prosecutions create jobs and income for them. Private defence counsel costs up to $500 an hour. Even if you can pay that your lawyer will be working to clock up the hours, not to acquit or terminate the proceedings in favour of the client.

We don’t have speed dating in New Brunswick – we have speed prosecuting.

New Brunswick Tobique-Mactaquac Federal Green Party candidate Terry Wishart!!!!!

Bigot Mayor Brad Woodside to continue to rule this City for years and years???