Wednesday, January 19, 2011

IT'S THE 19TH. WE EXPECT TO HEAR SOON TODAY/ Part 424 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

As this day begins, I have no idea what to say. We still must wait. The minutes crawl. It is now entirely up to Judge Thomas Crabtree. We are expecting that he has instructed the judicial case manager to provide a written ruling to both the Baynes and the Director via email some time today. The manager will then reserve a court date at which time the Judge will formally read his entire decision. Then the ruling is official. We know this is such an important ruling for the Bayne family. In fact it may carry consequences that make it a critical ruling in our provincial child protection practice. Can you imagine what these past few days and nights have been like for Zabeth and Paul? Josiah, the unborn son that Zabeth carries, still waits to be born. Given her history of premature births, we are grateful for his timing.

As soon as I hear, you will read it on this web page.
Well it's 11:15 AM and still no word. Ray Ferris and I were just speaking on the phone and another delay is not out of the question. We have watched delays in this case repeatedly. And this is a day when Paul and Zabeth have a visitation scheduled with their three children. The strain must be incredible.
It is now 2:15 PM and still no word. I am sorry for the Baynes that the communication has not been clearer as to when to expect word. We will continue to wait together won't we?
It's 5:32 PM so contact is likely not happening today. We certainly thought we heard Judge Thomas Crabtree correctly on that last day in court. We heard that he would try to write his ruling by this date. What we believe we also heard was that he would email the decision to both parties today and that a later date in court he would read his entire ruling. With the scarcity of court room space and time, that could be difficult to schedule. We certainly did not get the impression that Judge Crabtree would prolong this unnecessarily. He seemed most sensitive to Zabeth and to Paul. What is troublesome and unacceptable is the failure by the court to consider the Baynes and provide them with some clue about process. This is most disappointing.

So many of you today have been waiting as eagerly as we have here for some word. Even at this hour 1,429 people have read this post today. Thank you for the indication of support. Would you please kindly check back from time to time to see whether we know anything more.


  1. "Horses can't gallop on rocks; oceans can't be plowed. But you have turned justice and fairness into bitter poison." (Amos 6:12)

    Why should we allow one man who hardly know anything of the family in question to decide the custody of other people's children? This power is barbaric, oppressive and inhumane.

    I pray that God's will be done today.

  2. In cases like these, the family should have the option of selecting a jury. Especially if things are so "complicated." At least a jury of one's peers would not take three months to deliberate.

    I think this abominable case is all about the Province covering for Dr. Colbourne, the individual who got the Baynes family into this mess with her ridiculous diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome. The general strategy appears to have been to spread the muck around to draw attention away from this single source of blame.

    I have no doubt the Attorney General funded this so deeply to punish the Baynes for their public protests against Gordon Campbell, and so the process would serve as a deterrent to other parents who would refuse to admit guilt, or refuse services that have no justification.

    This is a no-win situation for MCFD, because they later have to justify the time and cost spent on this case. EVERY such case should, in theory go through the same excruciating process. MCFD cannot be be crying 'underfunded' and 'lack of resource' when one sees this public display of incredible waste and inefficiency.

    I'm keeping an eye on the BC Provincial database at

    I typed in CFCSA and Search in the 'Last 7 Days' and I see another Chilliwack judgment.

    If there is to be no oral reading, or perhaps a reading of a "short" version, what I am familiar with what happens is a day (or three) before the judgment is released, each party is notified by phone and email by a representative of the court. The usual posting time is 10:00am.

    What I am really looking forward to is how the press will distill the ruling into a story.

    It is now 10:17 AM January 19th, 2011, the time Judge Crabtree stated he would have his judgment completed by.

  3. Poking about the Provincial Database and searching judgments with Crabtree in the year 2010, I came across two, this one:

    It discusses matters of delay of due process, "Mr. Ghislieri has been denied his right under s. 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11 (the “Charter”) to be tried within a reasonable time. This, in other words familiar to the legal profession, is an Askov application."

    Note the observations by the judge as he agrees the individual's rights were infringed.

  4. Anonymous, great question...

    "Why should we allow one man who hardly know anything of the family in question to decide the custody of other people's children? This power is barbaric, oppressive and inhumane."

    I think the key phrase is 'Why should we allow...'

    My question to everyone is...

    'how long will we continue to allow...'

  5. You are right about the projected time for this ruling but I confess I have seen more than enough delay at various levels and stages in this case that I will not be surprised today if we keep waiting - disappointed nevertheless. Thanks for the link.


  7. When is enough enough? More delays will only affirm that family court is a fiasco. This is unacceptable. The Baynes have suffered enough. Let this family go.

  8. Who are these judges? Who are these people? and what do we know about those in authority? Why do the rules for the rest of society not apply to these people who sit as judges?
    I was in court today and was BEYOND sickened by the judge being called 'worship',...are you kidding me? The only 'worship' is Jesus Christ. PERIOD. END OF STORY. How many of these so called 'judges' know a word in the HOLY BIBLE that sits in front of their faces everyday all day? At the end of the day WE ARE ALL JUDGED BY THE RULER OF THE UNIVERSE after physical death,...I can't wait to see these Canadian 'politicians', 'lawyers', 'judges' stand before their CREATOR and explain why they did what they did and said what they said,...people better WAKE UP and see we are UNDER a DICTATORSHIP, NOT A DEMOCRACY.

    Jesus gave us TWO COMMANDENTS, FIRST LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH EVERYTHING YOU'VE GOT, SECOND, LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOUR AS YOURSELF, how is that happening in this case and in thousands of other cases worldwide re:'child protective services'?

    Who cares about these children? Who cares about these families?...Who? Who cares about what they've lost? Obviously it's not any MCFD DIRECTOR, SOCIAL WORKER or any of the countless useless government agencies & these clueless gov't workers who get their paycheck every two weeks because "I'm a government worker" that you can 'call for help'...

    This situation with the Baynes is beyond 'stupid' and government shows us once again who they really are and who they really serve, can't have two masters Jesus tells us and part of the character of Christ is JUSTICE and JUDGEMENT, I think someone better take a LOUD SPEAKER to these judges & lawyers & politicians ears and start reading the WORD OF GOD to them so they'll get a real clear picture of who God really is,...and what's going to happen to them if they don't REPENT,..I LIKE TO CALL IT ROAR - REPENT OR ASSUME RISK!!! Look out folks cause GOD IS WATCHING AND TAKING NOTES,...

  9. If the Baynes had initiate the action, the court-rental fees would amount to something like $10,000 for the four weeks. A pittance, compared to the daily lawyer fees on both sides. If costs were awarded, (ie. legal fees covered) it would be something like $25,000 per week.

    The fee is not designed to cover actual costs, but to deter people from dragging on trials for too long.

    Litigants here pay $156 for a half day or less in court, $316 a day for the first five days of a trial, $416 a day for days six through 10 and $624 a day afterwards.

  10. Anon 1:51 PM
    Good story link and thanks for that...
    the head line data was this for those who want to look it up - check the link in the comment above.

    "Daily court hearing fees are unconstitutional, B.C. Supreme Court told

    Provincially imposed daily hearing fees for legal proceedings are unconstitutional, "irrational" and block access to justice, B.C. Supreme Court has been told.

    By Vancouver Sun March 30, 2010 Be the first to post a comment "

  11. To: Anonymous (January 19, 2011 12:09 PM)

    The person whom others called a worship is not a judge. He/she is a justice of peace (JP) who mostly hears initial appearance and acting as judicial case manager (JCM).

    If you have a problem hearing them being called Your Worship, wait until you go to a Supreme Court where judges there are called My Lord. They are certainly not our Lord Jesus Christ sitting on the bench.

    To another Anon who asked "When is enough enough?" To special interests in the "child protection" industry, enough is never enough long as there are tax dollars available for them to milk. This problem will persist as long as the majority of the population remain ignorant, unaware of the real nature of the "child protection" business and there are people who believe that power to remove children should not be revoked as it is needed in protecting children.

    In the Bayne's case, while there is little or no evidence suggesting abuse from parents, there are plenty of evidence confirming abuse of power, violation of provisions in CFCSA (most notably making decision in a timely manner) and natural justice. This includes both the judiciary and MCFD bureaucrats.

    It is now 4:26 p.m. It is unlikely that a decision will be handed down today. I begin to suspect that the judiciary is working with MCFD to force the Baynes to accept unwanted MCFD services on their unborn before handing down a decision. It may appear ungracious to say that administration of justice has been brought into disrepute. I assure you that the Bayne's case is not an isolated incident.

  12. I sincerely hope that you are as wrong as you can be with regard to complicity between the judiciary and MCFD, because that would kick this case into another level of horror equivalent maybe to the Twilight Zone or Papa Doc's former Haitian regime. That is too terrible to contemplate. And I know the Baynes are not the exception to some rule of efficient fairness. They are one example of families caught in the unaccountable unmonitored powerhouse of a ministry section that should be helping us all. I will continue to hope there was a reasonable explanation for this dropped ball today/.

  13. To Ron (11:11 AM 4:50 PM today)

    I wish that I am totally wrong as well. All I am suggesting are inconsistent with the Canada I knew years ago when I was as naive and ignorant as most Canadians who blindly trust their government and live in their own comfortable fantasy. It is indeed inconceivable in a so-called free and democratic country. However, facts suggest otherwise and are compelling me to take a more cynical view.

    Your comrade Mr. Ferris is correct in at least one aspect that MCFD could not acquire this oppressive power without accomplice. The judiciary is one of them. Is it scary? Sure it is. Is it paranoid? Given what I have seen, not really. Is it an unfair remark? No. Just ask yourself, why it takes so long for an experienced judge to make this decision? Is the timing of handing down the decision so close to the delivery of the Bayne's unborn a coincidence or a conspiracy? God knows.

    Regarding your question of the cost of one court day, media reported a few weeks ago that there is a serious shortage of provincial court judges and alleged that it costs taxpayers $1.6 million in court clerical and security services in support of 1 judge. They are making about $125K per year. Using 261 business days a year, the cost is about $6,609 a day.

    Google this news and see whether you find this news.

  14. What does that mean Ron? Dropped ball.. because if it means what I think it to mean than I have to believe that kahoots does indeed exist between MCFD and the court.

  15. Dr. Colbourne reminds me of another shaken baby syndrome supporter and promoter, that is, the former doctor, and now internationally disgraced, Charles Smith.

    If justice is not done in this case, there are going to be a lot of people who will be supremely motivated to expose and end the corrupt practices of MCFD and other agencies that purport to protect children. If justice is done, and the children are returned, those same people are still going to continue fighting, strengthened by the knowledge that progress can be made.

    As far as no judgment being received from Judge Crabtree, there's no excuse for this (unless he was in some accident or something that we somehow didn't hear about), and there is definately no excuse for someone in the court system failing to provide an explanation as to why the judgment is not on time.

  16. Ron, would it be possible to check the transcript of the last court date in order to see exactly what Judge Crabtree said regarding when he give his decision?

  17. Ron, could you possibly check the transcript and see what Judge Crabtree said about when he would provide his decision?

  18. Rather than speculate, let's all continue to pray for justice and visualize all of them together again, enjoying life...

  19. I can't help but wonder...

    what "reasonable" explanation for this could there possibly be?

  20. Thanks so much again Ron for following this case so closely and taking the time to post the events in your blog.
    Thank you all for your prayers and support for the baynes family and may god bless you all.

  21. "what "reasonable" explanation for this could there possibly be?"

    No baby born no judgement. Ok so this isn't reasonable but it almost seems like the MCFD is in cahoots with the Judge or is it the other way around. Get the new child into care then decide, that way the baby can't bond with mom for the first few days/months. However long it takes for the Judge to "decide" on what is "best" for this family.
    Yes, this is wrong but who said anything about MCFD or the Judges doing anything right for this family since the beginning of this fiasco.

    Still praying that this family is restored.

  22. There is something seriously wrong here. That is not news to anyone. It is emotional and psychological terrorism. This Judge sat thru one of the longest family court trials I have heard of. Than took a significant amount of time to review the submissions at great length. There is no reasonable or acceptable excuse to prolong the suffering heaped upon these individuals. Justice delayed is Justice denied.


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