Friday, February 25, 2011
THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #4 / Part 453 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne
Mr. Christie re-entered the courtroom at 11:30 am and the 'public' dressed in black, the Bayne Train came with him. Again we packed the court room seats. We listened to several other cases handled speedily and then the judge permitted Mr. Christie to speak. This time Judge Arthur-Leung wanted to see Paul and Zabeth, so they stepped forward. Josiah's name was stated and spelled out 'Josiah Magnus Ider Bayne' and his birth-date, February 10th was given. Mr. Christie then sought to establish the quandary that occurs that an affidavit containing the identical material used in another case in another Registry (jurisdiction) could be used in this Registry when the prior case had already been heard by another judge (Judge Crabtree), and in fact was going to be ruled upon by him within four days, February 28th. Further Christie pointed out that there was nothing in this affidavit that alleges any misconduct by parents against Josiah. This should not even be heard and specially in this Registry. Her honour made it abundantly clear that this baby resided in Surrey and the case would be heard here and in that sense it was different from the other case where the three siblings were resident of Hope when the said allegations took place. Christie methodically but with some haste went through the Ministry's affidavit paragraph by paragraph while pointing out how irrelevant to Josiah all of this was as a justification for his apprehension. Christie underscored that the affidavit attests to using removal because there was no less intrusive means to protect this child but that this was patently false. The baby was premature, not weighing four pounds, and would have to remain in hospital for some time, at least until after Judge Crabtree had delivered his ruling on the worthiness of the parents to parent the other three children, a verdict which profoundly speaks to this case. Then he pointed out that the Baynes had presented a parenting plan to MCFD which is not even a requirement in this province to be a parent. He mentioned the huge network of support within community that they have. He said this removal should not have happened. There was no basis for apprehension. This is an abuse of process.
Then shortly before noon, the judge indicated that instead of getting back into this case, she was going to give the staff their deserved break and she would return at 1:30 pm, but again she made it clear she would not attend to this item until she cleared her morning list of cases.
There's more at 2:00 pm