IF IT WASN'T SBS, THEN WHAT? DON'T KNOW? PRECISELY! LET THE CHILDREN GO! / 486

Maybe this will keep you going until Monday.

The questionable convictions in Ontario in the 1980's and 90's, some of which were were based upon Shaken Baby Syndrome, and some of which were because of testimony by now-disgraced pathologist Charles Smith, render Judge Crabtree's conclusion to the Bayne questionable if not impugnable.

If the Baynes' children should not be retained in the province of British Columbia foster care system because the judge dismissed SBS as a cause for one child's injuries, then there is no reason whatsoever for them to be in care. None whatsoever.

In the middle of a circle of cows

Don't tell me there is a risk. If the law cannot say that the risk is a definite 80%, or 50% or 30% then don't speak about a probability of risk. Then for Judge Crabtree to venture a 10% risk probability is fanciful nonsense, deplorable.

STAGES 1&2 OF CRABTREE'S DECISION PROCESS / 485

Chief Justice Thomas Crabtree

(On Monday: Judge Crabtree's verbatim Conclusion)

Near the end of the 39 page 'reasons' document released March 2, 2011, Judge Crabtree renders his conclusion in two stages.

Today, I am restating for you the conclusion to which Judge Thomas Crabtree arrived. I have taken liberty here to write the Judge's remarks in the third person. Where most appropriate, I have quoted Judge Crabtree's own words.

An Index of My Previous Posts about Judge Crabtree's Reasons / 484

(Tomorrow I give you my version of Judge Crabtree's two-stage decision)

In a series of posts following Judge Crabtree's release of his reasons for his decision on March 2, 2011, I highlighted several aspects of that 39 page ruling. I read the 39 page document and I quoted certain sections of it but primarily interpreted its content. The series provided a fair synopsis of his thinking and decision.

For example I gave the straight up concluding facts of the decision. The judge did not accept the shaken baby syndrome premise put forward by the Ministry and he found inconsistencies in Zabeth's explanation of an accident to account for her daughter's injuries. He did not return the three children to them but he also did not grant the Ministry its applied for Continuing Care Order.
Part 464: The Judge Rules – Not Good News
Part 465: The Last Word

Chilliwack News Runs this Story

Hope Couple Appealing Judge's Decision, By Tim Amey, Tuesday, March 22, 2011 11:00 AM ....... an interview with Doug Christie

THE BAYNE STORY IS LIKE AN ONION / 483

A story is usually a layered piece of literature, like an onion, once the peel is removed, you find one layer upon another. There are layers of meaning in the story of Paul and Zabeth Bayne and their four children. Each of us seeks to get beneath the initial layers which are so familiar to us, to see what lies inside the onion of this story.

CYBER JUSTICE & JUSTICE CRABTREE / 482

For two year old Bridger who already moves with dexterity over the face of his iPad, cyberjustice will be automatic in both acceptance and practice when and if he is a lawyer or a judge. It is our present older generations that struggle with the concept.

Clearly there is socio-cultural and psycho-scientific unwillingness to change in most areas of our lives. This has been particularly true in a realm where tradition, custom, predictable patterns and dependence on regulations, symbolize the justice system. These hallmarks may not be effectively serving the justice system any longer. People have difficulty accessing justice in our system because of the excessive legal costs and the bottle-necked courts, so necessity is compelling the judicial community to utilize technology. The accelerating potential of technology will transform the courtroom. Certainly it must be a carefully studied modification because there are substantial traditions in law. Can these traditions be adapted to the digital age? The research must convincingly determine how our new technologies influence the trial process.

Today's Chilliwack Progress article by Robert Freeman - entitled, 'Judge rejects ‘shaken-baby’ diagnosis'
Published: March 21, 2011 3:00 PM, Updated: March 21, 2011 3:21 PM

JUDGE CRABTREE RULING ON THE BAYNE CASE / 481

Posted earlier today - Now with regrets, removed under advisement - We will wait for further word
Further to.............

PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

JUDGEMENT DATABASE

I have placed here direct quotations from the pages of the Provincial Court of B.C. database and I have emboldened and italicized several sentences to explain part of the reason for removing the link to Judge Crabtree's ruling which I earlier placed online, but then reconsidered. I want Judge Crabtree to endorse the publication of his own decision with respect to the MCFD's application for a Continuing Care Order with regard to the three children of Paul and Zabeth Bayne (File No. F10073, Registry: Chilliwack). Ultimately, reference to all such online decisions falls within the purview of B.C.'s Chief Judge who is Justice Crabtree. 

HAS MCFD'S COMPLAINT RESOLUTION PROCESS WORKED FOR YOU? / 480

Hon. Mary McNeill & Hon. Steven Point

A new photograph of the Honourable Mary McNeill together with the Lieutenant Governor Steven Point on the occasion of her signing her oath of office is the only indication thus far that there has been a change of command at the Ministry of Children and Family Development.
 

Hon. Mary Polak

The Honourable Mary Polak is still pictured as the primary spokesperson of the Ministry to you when you see her and read her message of welcome to the MCFD website.

I'll cut Ms. McNeill and the Ministry a little slack since it has only been a bit more than a week since she took office and she has not been able to get to all of the tasks that will stack up in her inbox and task box. I wonder how soon she and her deputy minister will place their unique marks on the service plan and the CAPP. How much time must be granted to them as a learning curve?

GIVE THEM A CHANCE AS A FAMILY! / 479

BAYNE CAMPAIGN

The Bayne family deserves a chance to live as a family. It has been apart far too long. Longer than was necessary. On March 2^nd 2011, a Court of Law overruled the Ministry of Children's foundational ground for intervention and care of three children. Judge Thomas Crabtree dismissed the shaken baby allegation, yet found no satisfactory explanation for injuries sustained in 2007 by the youngest of three children of Zabeth and Paul Bayne. Therefore a minimal level of risk was still assigned to them and the children remain in care for the specified period of six months. The case file has been transferred to the Surrey branch of MCFD with new caseworkers. Representatives of this branch and the Bayne parents have met together with a view to develop communication and to discuss action steps. It is hoped this is being conducted with a view to returning the children to the Baynes. The infant son, born February 10, 2011, who was removed four hours after birth in conjunction with the order in force at that time, is unfortunately a separate case even though integrally linked to the outcome of the earlier case. This continues to be a punishing and lengthy time for Paul and Zabeth, which at times must seem like it will never end. Remember them.