Tuesday, 1 September 2015

A By-Stander point of view on Blogger Charles LeBlanc's hearing!!!!

IMGP6529fuckup

JUSTICE NEW BRUNSWICK STYLE

Hearing 26th August 2015: R. v. LeBlanc

At Charles’ hearing, on 26th August, Miramichi Detective Constables Greg Scott and Shane Henderson testified, under oath, for the Crown. Scott testified he swore on oath, before Julian Dickson, that he “had reasonable and probable grounds to believe, and does believe” Charles assaulted Andrew Spencer, July 3, 2014. On cross examination Scott said, if he had known certain other information, he was not sure he would have sworn the charge.

The judge refused to allow video evidence to be played, that Charles knows would prove Spencer filed a false complaint, and the police and Crown never had a case. The video interview was the reason Andrew Spencer - our drunk, abusive “poet” - crossed a street and confronted Charles. The police officers both swore, again and again, Spencer “confronted” Charles, Spencer admitted to “confronting” Charles, the confrontation was about the video interview, and neither of them had viewed the interview, or obtained a copy. They had no idea the interview was uploaded two years before Spencer suddenly decided to confront Charles about it. The Crown and judge said all of that is irrelevant, and asked Charles to stick to the facts!

This is the video the so-called Poet is all upset about - <Miramichi Police believe I'm producing Child porn with this video >



The judge even interrupted to stop the police answering certain questions. He also argued the Crown case. He interrupted Charles a lot, clearly didn’t want him to cross examine the officers, and seemed to have decided to throw out Charles’ motion before he even stepped into the court room. He interrupted the first officer’s testimony to say, if the second officer gave the same evidence, the charge was properly sworn and the motion would be dismissed. Many times McLean said he was accommodating Charles, as a self-represented defendant. In truth, he just kept interrupting, to confuse and distract him.

McLean also told Charles the judges have nothing to do with transcripts and court audio, do not even see the applications, and he could not think of anything he could do to help with that matter, which is not accurate. The court administration told Charles Justice Dickson refused his application, for the audio recordings of the hearings, prior to McLean taking over. I, and others, have been told: release of court recordings must be approved by the presiding judge. Justice McLean told Charles he had been a criminal defence lawyer for many, many years, so he knew Charles should have been granted the entire proceeding so far, on disk, for $20.

S/Sgt. Matt Myers sent this allegation to the Miramichi, and instigated a prosecution, with no evidence to support it, other than the word of a drunk, abusive street person.

Let us not forget: Myers was one of the arresting officers, in the monumentally flawed attempt to charge and convict his fellow officer, Jeff Smiley. At the Smiley trial Myers admitted, under oath, that he argued with Smiley and they were not on good terms. We have to ask if he wanted revenge on Smiley. The judge threw the assault charge out, for lack of jurisdiction; ten or more FPF and RCMP officers “did not notice” the alleged offence was in Nova Scotia, and they had no jurisdiction. How did they not notice, through eight months of “investigation”? The Crown and Myers wanted to proceed with the breach of undertaking but the judge threw that out as well, saying: if the original charge does not go to trial, any related undertaking is invalid.

Justice David Walker called the police investigation “fundamentally flawed,” and “sloppy”. I think he was being polite.

In December 2014, Smiley told the press:

“...this was a negligent, vindictive investigation dr/>irected at me. I will be filing a formal complaint against the Fredericton Police Force and the RCMP for misconduct, including perjury, fabricating evidence and falsifying police documents, amongst others.” The article went on to say: “Smiley wrote he’s concerned officers who investigated and arrested him might have violated the rights of others in other cases.”

During a recess, between examination of the Miramichi officers, they asked Charles to bring some friends and speak to them. They asked him to sign a peace bond and the prosecution would end! Charles said: if Spencer wants to sign a peace bond, to stay away from him, great. That offer is a sure sign the cops and Crown need a way out.

This proceeding against Charles is not a prosecution – it is persecution. It is systemic abuse of power and a waste of public funds, as this City and province slide deeper into debt. It is time Woodside took responsibility for his rogue police force.

24 comments:

  1. Right on! We must get rid of the corruption in our Police Force and the Criminal Courts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is going to get interesting. Keep on trucking Charles - you can do it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Offering you a peace bond? Id get a lawyer, tell them to shove the peace bond up you know where and go to trial and when you are found not guilty sit back and laugh at them as usual and the article about their negligence in the newspaper and media etc..

    ReplyDelete
  4. But a lawyer told me a neutral peace bond is not a bad thing....we both sign and move on but would this be admitting to guilt? I know 100% I'm not guilty..the system is on trial and not me..

    ReplyDelete
  5. Charles : That is true and no its not an admission of guilt ! But if they are offering you a peace bond and you dont even have a lawyer, that tells me that their case is a complete loser and they know it . Get a lawyer , tell them to shove the peace bond and go to trial . I suspect once they found out you had a trial lawyer they would drop this if not make a fool out of them walking at trial and in the subsequent media coverage .

    ReplyDelete
  6. I would be wary of a peace bond involving Andrew Spencer. The FPFarce already took his word that you assaulted him - what is to stop him harassing you again, and telling the police you violated the peace bond? You will be right back in court.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I would not trust a lawyer who told you a "neutral peace bond" is not a bad thing. Peace bonds are orders of the court, and violation of that order can be charged as a summary offence. It would require Charles to agree to an order to stay away from Spencer - impossible when you live downtown and he panhandles downtown. Peace bonds are supposed to be signed before charges are laid, and require a hearing, to prove they are necessary. At such a hearing Charles would be able to present evidence that Spencer is the problem. The article does not mention any agreement that Spencer would even be asked to sign one - meaning this would not be a "neutral peace bond". If Charles signs a peace bond he is admitting he is a danger to Spencer - not a good idea - and leaving himself open to more false charges, for violating a court order. Peace bonds are no-contact orders, which normally require the signatory to "keep the peace and be of good behaviour" for a year. I would not trust these cops with that kind of power over me....

    ReplyDelete
  8. Get a lawyer and go to trial ! The Crown prosecutor will look really cute putting his star witness Andrew Spencer on the stand thats if he even shows up to trial...

    ReplyDelete
  9. 12:12 Exactly ! Charles...Go to trial

    ReplyDelete
  10. charles be careful , u sign they save face and u end up with conditions on u , that police exploit

    ReplyDelete
  11. If Charles signs a peace bond he will - without question - be admitting he is a “suspect” and “an offender” as the Criminal Code requires. Innocent people are not asked to sign peace bonds. Also, prior to trial, the Crown has no jurisdiction to stop a prosecution with a peace bond. Once underway, a prosecution can only be stopped by a stay of proceedings (Attorney General or Judicial), the Crown entering "no evidence" to be called, or requesting the judge's permission to withdraw the charge. A peace bond is not for ending a prosecution, it is to protect individuals from “suspects” and persons deemed “offenders”. The Federal Department of Justice has this to say, about Peace Bonds:

    There is often insufficient evidence to support a charge. Peace bonds and civil protection orders are not substitutes for criminal charges. Charges should be laid where there is evidence to support them…Advise the complainant to immediately report any breach of conditions of any court orders so that prompt action can be taken against the suspect(!!!) Be sure the victim understands that it is imperative to report all breaches in order to maintain offender accountability. Letting "little" breaches slide can entrench the offender in increasingly serious conduct. Also advise victims of the limitations of a peace bond and remind them of the continuing need to take precautionary measures.

    The Criminal Code, s. 810, requires a peace bond to be applied for, by laying an Information, on behalf of the “victim, stating it is necessary and why. It requires a full hearing, with testimony and evidence from the alleged victim. This “offer” from the cops, not the Crown, makes this prosecution highly suspect. The Crown planted its flag in the ground, saying it had reasonable grounds and evidence to accept the charge for prosecution. The time for a peace bond is over and done. The fact it was not requested at the time of the alleged “offence” is admission that Spencer was never in any danger. The Crown prosecutor is desperately trying to conceal how corrupt he, the police and the Attorney General’s office are. Charles – if you sign it will be as an un-convicted "offender", suspect and danger to Andrew Spencer. The lawyer who said otherwise is an idiot. Tell the Crown you would need a full hearing, to prove a peace bond is necessary, and – of course – that means Andrew Spencer’s testimony under oath is necessary. And we ALL want to see Spencer testify under oath.

    ReplyDelete
  12. NB Public Legal Education and Information Service says - What is a dual peace bond?Sometimes both parties claim that the other person is the aggressor, the one who should be keeping the peace. Although this is not common, the Courts will sometimes issue dual peace bonds, so that both of the parties are required to keep the peace and be of good behavior to one another." I wonder if the lawyer meant dual peace bond when he said neutral. I think a dual peace bond would require the charge to be withdrawn completely but then if a dual bond was signed Charles would be admitting he was part of the reason for the disagreement. This smells bad however we look at it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Get Spencer under oath and on the stand either at trial or a peace bond hearing.

    ReplyDelete
  14. How much are all these verbal supporters donating to your legal funds, it appears that there is consensus about your going to trial. The issue is that Charles needs a Lawyer which he cannot afford, and that Legal aid refused to grant him. Rather than talking about the cause contribute.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Stephen Horseman better get ready - as Justice Minister he runs the failing provincial courts, is responsible for court recordings and transcripts, is responsible for the Law Society's corrupt lawyers and is the minister responsible for our unconstitutional Legal Aid Services. As Minister for Public Safety he is, of course, responsible for the corrupt cops involved in this. I think Charles will have a lot of questions for him.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I am a supporter of the Defence Fund for Charles LeBlanc. My big fear is that even if we raise the required money for a Lawyer, where are we going to find a lawyer that is not ruled by the Law Society of N.B. who also control Legal Aid? There definitely should be an investigation of the Law Society, Legal Aid and the Court System that leans towards corruption and seems to have little tolerance for people with mental problems, even Poet Spencer.

    ReplyDelete
  17. To 18:44: I appreciate your concerns and they provoked me to consider: realistically, who can we turn to, to investigate the Law Society of New Brunswick and Legal Aid? The Minister of Justice, who is responsible for both the Law Society Act and the Legal Aid Act, whose office facilitated their misconduct for decades? The Premier or Attorney General, who are lawyers and Law Society members? There isn't one lawyer in this province who is not bound to kowtow to the Law Society, just to keep earning a salary. Those who stood up for justice have been run out of town, disbarred or disgraced. Is the Government of New Brunswick going to investigate its Law Society and Legal Aid Services? Never. Not only are the premier and Attorney General Law Society members, all key government advisory civil servants are also Law Society members, the Clerks of the Court and Registrars are... Law Society members, who do NOT serve the public interest. Legal Aid is run by Law Society members, their kin are the Crown Prosecutors who tell them to get their clients to plead guilty, fail to gather evidence and bail on them. Every single judge we have came from the corrupt Law Society of New Brunswick and is loyal to the Law Society, over and above all else, especially justice for the people who pay their salaries. The people of New Brunswick are only just beginning to see the tip of the iceberg of corruption in this province - there is a lot more to learn than you can even begin to imagine. Lawyers run this province. They always have - it is only people standing up, to protest and complain, who can change that. Charles is one of the most important people I know - he has the fight, the understanding and the public's ear. Keep it up Charles - we need to change things.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Peace bonds are not neutral and they send a message that whoever signs one is admitting to being a potential threat to another person. I agree with the people who say don't sign. You are right Charles - Andrew Spencer should be the one signing.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Did Andrew hit Charles? Or did Charles hit Andrew? Just curious.

    ReplyDelete
  20. To 06:37. The Miramichi police have a sworn, independent witness statement, from a reliable witness, confirming Spencer struck out at Charles' head first, and provoked a defensive strike from Charles. Charles also confirmed that on his blog. The police chose to believe Spencer, who did not provide a sworn statement at any time.

    ReplyDelete
  21. We all know that the FPF are out for revenge. They did not like it that Charles made a video of the FPF beating up a soldier. Where in hell do we go from here? The FPF are crooked, the Courts are crooked and we must start watching which politicial party appointed the judge in certain cases.

    ReplyDelete
  22. to 19:44 I am so glad that someone in this city has the nerve to say what so long remains unsaid. Judges are appointed by politicial parties. Judges make decision on what their appointees want. Take it in folks - only the party gets to win.

    ReplyDelete
  23. MacLean was appointed Feb 2014 - making him a conservative choice, and we know those people were gunning for Charles. The trouble is, it doesn't matter who appoints the judge: whoever you vote for, the Government of New Bunswick always gets in. The GNB is extremely corrupt, and every newly appointed GNB inherits and hides the historical corruption. This province needs to implode, and be on its knees financially, before anything improves.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The official language of Saint Barthélemy is French.

    ReplyDelete