Wednesday, September 1, 2010
JUDGE's INTEGRITY IN QUESTION
Lori Douglas, associate chief justice of Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench (family division) has stepped away from her duties in light of a formal complaint revealed by CBC yesterday. The lurid details required a publication explanation by CBC that speaks to the duty to inquire and report on these matters, and to pursue accountability. The Family Division includes child protection cases. Ponder that scenario. CBC Video Story
3 comments:
I encourage your comments using this filter.
1. Write politely with a sincere statement, valid question, justifiable comment.
2. Engage with the blog post or a previous comment whether you agree or disagree.
3. Avoid hate, profanity, name calling, character attack, slander and threats, particularly when using specific names.
4. Do not advertise
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A play on a quote by Thomas Fuller, an English clergyman:
ReplyDelete"A fox should not be the judge at a goose's trial."
Now the poor judge is being made out to be the victim:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/prominent-city-jurist-the-victim-legal-experts-101953793.html
CBC's rather lengthy justification omitted easily discernible truth, that if they didn't publish the story first someone else would have, and they would be left out of the cold on this scoop. CBC did not publish any dissenting opinions. Their logic for publishing the story certainly appears irrefutable, the public is indeed "entitled to know these things," but perhaps the question is, when is the appropriate time.
ReplyDeleteMy observation is this lurid report pales in comparison to what is happening in open court to the Baynes, and this is not being adequately reported. Perhaps news organizations are... WAITING FOR THE OUTCOME of the case.
A journalist friend of mind who worked for Southam news remarked on the unbelievable process that occurred for how news was selected for publication. Where such stories were placed and the headlines chosen where the criteria was what would produced the greatest interest. Fluff versus substance.
I think an equally close look at the messenger of this information is warranted. CBC in in possession of the pictures, so I'm sure they are very confident in their position, and I do tend to respect them as a fair news organization. I find it difficult not to side with their reasoning and presentation of this case.
But think, can you imagine if parents had the contents of their report to court published, or even the fact their children were removed so everyone this family knew know was informed? This would be a case where there were no criminal charges, just allegations being publicized without the complete story being known first. Disaster.
A church with rogue ministers who have been verified as having abused children where the matter is deliberately being kept quiet for the good of the organization and has not yet been removed is a different situation. This is a clear danger to the public that needs immediate publication.
If, when all is said and done this non-disclosure by the judge does require her removal, I would expect all other judges with similar backgrounds to come forward and resign to save the hassle and embarrassment.
On one hand, a thirty year legal career is likely to be wiped out almost immediately, and this judge would become virtually unemployable in a public field, because the matter was so decided in public without the benefit of due process first. A judge can't function in public when people facing her have this image portrayed of her from news stories. There is no need for suspension, the judge would be scared to go to work.
On the other hand, what measurable damages to the court system has occurred? The allegations suggest the court system may have been compromised, so I would like to know how, and what process is used to determine this so my faith in the system remains intact. (I'll pretend MCFD and CFCSA doesn't exist for a moment.)
Are the normal checks and balances in the legal system rendered useless because of how someone conducts themselves behind closed doors?
The integrity of the legal system is supposed to be such that there are checks and balances that counteract any individual anomalies so that law only rules, not the personal disposition of a judge to rule one way or another. This is a perfect case to test this hypothesis.
People wronged can appeal or complain to the chief justice or ask for a judicial review. This Judge's record needs to be looked at, and I am assuming this would have been done as part of the selection process for the chief justice position.
Manitoba is a tiny little Province, perhaps 1.2 million population. The court website doesn't publish online judgments. They are filed in a paper library. Perhaps in Manitoba there is not a lot of the same checks and balances that would be more evident in larger Provinces.