Thursday, January 20, 2011

IT'S FEBRUARY NOW/ Part 425 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

The court did communicate with the Baynes mid afternoon yesterday but of course they were out. What the Baynes learned after they returned home yesterday from their afternoon visitation with their children was this. The Baynes have told me that the Judge's decision will be ready no later than the end of February 2011.

Yes! You read that correctly. But you weren't ready for it were you? Neither were the Baynes. We were not expecting that. Disappointed is not an adequate descriptor for the way that this news impacts the Baynes and their immediate family and certainly none of their supporters. After three and one half years, this is dreadful.

Alright so let's look at this. Judge Thomas Crabtree is an intelligent and a good man. Yes I believe that. I also believe that he is a responsible man and a good judge of both character and truth as it pertains to distinguishing evidence from collateral and unsubstantiated content. We have yet to hear his decision. It is coming. I am confident that he fully understands how this delay affects Paul and Zabeth. Further, when Judge Crabtree spoke at the end of the last day in court, his proposed date for delivering a ruling was a projection rather than a firm commitment. The date of the 19th was mentioned in his comments as an outside date and we naturally have hung on to that. Not mistakenly mind you, as verified by the court communication today on the 19th. This time the forecast carries the element of commitment. I surmise that Judge Crabtree regrets dragging this on longer yet. Therefore his message is firm as to time. (Click here and Read Ray Ferris' explanation among today's comments).

Well then, why has he given himself more time. Some of you will be quick to recite your inane conspiracy theories once again so I feel compelled to speculate too. It could be that having been newly appointed as the Chief Justice of B.C. he found that the transition and the obligations are more demanding than he anticipated. It may be that in his personal review of all of the CFCSA/Bayne case material he found that he requires more time to write exactly and precisely. Why the concentration on precision? Because his decision will reach beyond the Bayne Family reunion to speak to the way cases are being managed, people are being treated by the Child Protection network of social workers in this province. His decision will require the attention of the Ms. Du Toit, Ms. Polak and Ms. Turpel-Lafond. It has the potential for affecting the lives of countless other people.

I'll tell you what. That makes a great deal more sense than surmising some grand collusion between the judicial system and MCFD. Further, when Paul and Zabeth last evening through tears, considered the possibility that the delayed decision might help other parents eventually, they said that their pain for another month would be worthwhile if that were the outcome. That is the character that will be unmistakable to Judge Crabtree.

And if this Fraser Valley MCFD Team makes further overtures into involvement in the newborn Bayne child's life before this decision comes down, this may not only be unwise but also be career altering for some people when the press and when the Ministry in Victoria have to sort this out. I am aware of journalists clamouring to jump all over this story.

So many people were anxious to hear good news for the Baynes yesterday that there were over 2000 hits to this site in that 24 hour period. Good for you. You care. I do too.


  1. How incredibly disappointing! I've been sitting her waiting for the clock to strike 12--not the news we've all been waiting to hear. Let's hope that justice prevails and that things will be set right for Paul, Zabeth and the little ones. SOON!

  2. So, the extra 40 days would have absolutely nothing to do with the impending birth of the Baynes newborn? To say that I'm flabbergasted at this news would be an understatement. This is truly mindboggling.

    I would suspect Judge Crabtree has little say in the scheduling, but who else can be blaimed. A Judge that has as much experience as Crabtree does has can go through everything and write a hundred pages in a week or so, I don't care how seemingly complex a matter appears.

    Stay strong, Paul and Zabeth.

  3. Judgements can often take longer than this one has so far, so it isn't necessarily out of order, though frustrating and stressful. Given what Judge Crabtree stated about the validity of the doctor's evidence (the one who said it was abuse, can't remember her name right now), I can't see him ruling against the Baynes.

    This is an extremely important decision which will have implications for countless families, so it must be well written.

  4. Oh yes we should be very concerned for the Baynes and the new baby. You may want to read the link I have provided concerning MCFD. MCFD is so used to trashing the aboriginals in BC they have come to rely on these practices as the norm. OH, yes be very afraid. And it does state that the judiciary DOES work with MCFD.

  5. I hear you Lisa K, but do you think that my perception of Judge Crabtree has merit as well?

    The fact remains, I hope you are wrong. Further, I hope that you hope that you are wrong.

  6. Ron, I pray I am wrong. Your perception of Judge Crabtree may be spot-on. God, I hope so. Great things do happen and I have to believe you are correct in your observation. To say that I hope that the decision would go another way is highly insulting to someone who has been in this fight. You my friend have never lost a child to these people...

  7. Lisa, you are absolutely correct, that I have not lost a child to the ministry. Further, I have no idea how I would handle myself in such a situation or how I would express myself. Perhaps my pen would become more of a double edged saber, cutting forehand and backhand. I am thinking that I would not manage as well as Paul and Zabeth have done.

  8. I'm so sorry that you have to wait even longer. I will keep praying for you as you wait. May many, many families benefit from the results of this coming news.

  9. I apologize Ron, my anger should not be directed at you. We are all coping and doing the best we can with the news. I admire your ability to present and put to paper this heart-wrenching story without losing your objectivity.

  10. The time is ripe for another protest, right outside Gordon Campbell's office - again.

    Get the media in on this, and use this latest event to build up public awareness.

    This is no longer about the Baynes, this is about a complete failure of due process that sees extraordinary time and costs on a case that should have taken only a few days. The court time lost is responsible for setting free countless drunk drivers and petty criminals.

    The birth of the child is MCFD's last hope - hope that 'something' goes wrong and they get to intervene. Once that happens, no matter what the decision, they still have their foot in the door and "services" would need to continue.

    I believe I heard the figure that $6,000 goes to foster home costs, and perhaps $2,000 to $4,000 monthly for supervision, not to mention special services to keep these children in a "special needs" (read: more funding) category

    Round that off to $10,000 monthly to keep these three children away from their parents. Multiply that by the past 5 months. That should attract media and public interest alone.

  11. I was reading a case the other day and googled the lawyer for MCFD. Turns out she articled with none other than Judge Crabtree, before he was Chief Justice. This woman is also very high up in the Rotary Club (in Chilliwack, I believe). This suggests, once again, that all these people are friends, and that they acquire credibility by joining such apparently respectable organizations as the Rotary Club. Meanwhile, good parents are slandered and oppressed and denied their basic human rights and their children.

    I agree that we can't necessarily jump to conclusions. But I also agree that it is high time for another protest.

  12. On Dec. 28, 2003, one day after the BC Legislature Raid RCMP spokesperson John Ward told media that "organized crime has stretched into every corner of B.C.” and had reached “epidemic proportions in B.C.” Find how catastrophic is the corruption of the Justice Branch (and whole BC Government) from more than 400 posts at

    Thomas Jefferson: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."

  13. I am as disappointed as anyone else that the Bayne ordeal is not yet over. However, for those of you who read my blog of Jan 18th, you will realise that I am not in the least surprised. Why not? On December 22nd, Judge Crabtree made no firm commitment. He offered process. All he said was that he would deliver his verdict in writing by Jan 19 if he could and if he could not, he would do one or two other things. He would contact the judicial case manager, either to forward the verdict to the Baynes, or to set a hearing date when he would render a decision. So Jan 19 was just a date to set a date, which is often done in the legal system. There was no guarantee of anything. The best case scenario was that he would give his verdict. The worst case scenario was that he would set a new date. It could be months away. As I said two days ago, expect Murphy's law to prevail and expect the worst case.
    Are we any further ahead now? In one respect we are. We now have an ultimate limit on how long we must wait. No later than the end of Feb and this looks firm. Before there was no light at the end of the endless tunnel. There is now light at the end of the tunnel, but we do not know how long the tunnel is. At worst it will take another 39 days. At best it could be next week. Judge Crabtree oriinally estimated 8 to 12 weeks. That would have taken us to Feb 8th on a worst case scenario. I am hoping that the verdict will be before the end of the month. How about St Valentine's day for a family love-in?
    Judge Crabtree is no doubt a clever man and he knows exactly what has been going on. I hope he is also compassionate enough to understand just how hard these delays are on the Bayne family. He also knows about the threat to the unborn child. He must know if he has read all the submisssions. I am guessing that the delays are bothering him and he would like to see the end of it. As Ron says he may have good reasons. He has to worry about two things. I hope that his ruling will be a monumental decision, which has the potential to impact a mumber of issues regarding how child protection is practiced in this province. Issues on shaken baby. Issues on how courts work against child welfare and issues about how various people in the MCF conduct themselves. Let us hope that he is willing to inflict further stress on the Baynes because he wants to make sure that such cases do not recur. The other thing that he has to really worry about is to make his decision proof against appeal. He knows perfectly well that when Finn Jensen spent three days in summarising the miniatry case and produced 237 pages of transcript tha he was setting appeal traps for the judge. By making so many arguments, he forces the judge to address each one in is judgement. The arguments may be shallow, spurious, irrelevant or reasonable. It does not matter because process rules. It puts prssure on the defense to counter even the most stupid of arguments and it puts pressure on the judge to explain why he rejects them. Failure to do so might instantly provide grounds for appeal. Crazy yes, but how the system works. I will write more on this tomorrow.

  14. Just a comment that is unrelated to this Ron feel free to place it where ever you feel necessary. Recently I spoke to a friend who is an MLA for the NDP, I was discussing with him ways to change the CFCSA Act in order to hold the Ministry reponsible for wrongful apprehensions. He told me the following "what you need to do is get all the families who want the change to put their names on a list, this list you give to my friend who is a critic against the MCFD, and she will bring it to the legislature, and they will table it. Whats important is this although you gather names the names are not mentioned in the Legislature, it just gives an idea as to how many members of the public want the changes. So in other words if you get as many people as you can usually about 3000 people, to come forward the changes become law." So I want to get a list going to everyone who wants changes and what those changes should entail. Perhaps, Ray Ferris may have some ideas as to what the act should say. Hope this helps.

  15. Diana H
    your comment will remain here but I would like you to resend it to the Saturday posting, today's. I very much want people to read and to respond. I am encouraged with the possibility that this could work. I think that the downside will be the fear or reluctance of people to give their names when they are presently embroiled with MCFD.


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