Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Five Metres of "Evolving" Facts

Impolitical:

Since the facts surrounding the tale of the 5 metre perimeter rule seem to be evolving, this is the latest from the Globe. The police chief who publicly represented, on Friday morning, that there was a 5 metre perimeter zone beyond the fence in which people could be searched received information that afternoon clarifying that this was not actually the case. Notice did not go out to the public regarding the chief's mistaken representation.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

"Suddenly, You Were a Prisoner"

University Of Toronto Professor, Dan Dolderman, via TVO:

If you were there, suddenly, you were a prisoner and there wasn’t a damn thing you could do about it.

...The power of the state is.....wow. In person, it’s unbelievable. When the hammer comes down, the power of individuals to resist it is basically zilch. Might as well go toe to toe with a train.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

"No, But I Was Trying to Keep the Criminals Out."

Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, via CTV News:

Asked Tuesday if there actually was a five-metre rule given the ministry's clarification, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair smiled and said, "No, but I was trying to keep the criminals out."

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

"Terrified Me and Broke My Heart"

Lawrence A. Griden, a Toronto student-at law, via Law is Cool

Preliminary reports of apparent civil rights violations are coming in from all over the city. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association says that these were not isolated incidents.

I saw many with my own eyes. I was in downtown Toronto to take photos of this once-in-a-lifetime event. What I saw terrified me and broke my heart.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Correction:

The quote above was incorrectly attributed in an earlier version of this post, due to an RSS feed anomaly at the site linked to. This post has been corrected, accordingly.

- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

"I Asked for a Lawyer..."

Steve Cruikshank, 28, Newmarket (via the Toronto Star):

“I asked for medical attention and they said ‘No’, that I was ‘barely bleeding.’ I asked for a lawyer and wasn’t given access. I asked to make a phone call and they laughed.”
About three hours later, he was released without charge.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Toronto's Security Theatre

Is there anything in Toronto's history to suggest that fencing off most of downtown Toronto was even remotely necessary to adequately secure the G20 conference or to provide due protection for visiting world leaders?

Plainly, the answer is no.

The Harper security kabuki was bound to be taken as a constitutional affront by Toronto's law-abiding citizens and as a provocation by peaceful protesters who have every lawful right to make their voices heard.

That speaks for itself.

Even so, to my eyes, it looked like most of the "demonstrators" downtown were there for a street party, not a violent clash with authority.

With hindsight, we will be left wondering whether it was an overreaching security plan, rather than the G2o conference itself, that was the lightning rod that ignited so much of the commotion we have witnessed over the weekend.

Tellingly, the imposition of a virtual security regime in Toronto for the G20 weekend may have given the so-called "anarchists" (who look mostly to be youthful, attention-seeking thugs, rather than genuine political activists of any colour) a stunning victory by default, if the mere fear of their arrival could purport to justify locking down so much of our vital inner city.

That's a pretty serious accomplishment for a bunch of misdirected kids armed with sticks and stones and matches and spray-paint.

And an embarrassment to our nation.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG


G20 Security: What Side of the Fence Are You On?

For G20 summit delegations, Toronto, thankfully, remains a safe haven.

Outside the security perimeter, however, for the downtown business operators, peaceful demonstrators, residents and passers-by who have the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time...

Not so much.

It was all so predictable and so avoidable.

As CBC News is now reporting, many of the damaged and vandalized Toronto small businesses will be denied insurance coverage for their losses. The clamour for government compensation has already begun.

Needless to say, the wrongfully and needlessly-arrested will be left holding the bag for the costs of defending themselves in the courts.

On that note, TVO's Steve Paiken has emerged as the go-to journalist for live, on-the-street coverage. Last night he wrote:

i saw police brutality tonight. it was unnecessary. they asked me to leave the site or they would arrest me. i told them i was dong my job...
i have lived in toronto for 32 years. have never seen a day like this. shame on the vandals.... and shame on those that ordered peaceful protesters attacked and arrested. that is not consistent with democracy in toronto, G20 or no G20

Mr. Paiken's Twitter stream is here.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Ontario Reports Online (Revisited)

Precedent now has an article online regarding the arrival in April of the digital Ontario Reports. I have a few, brief comments quoted in this article.

See: News: Ontario Reports go online

My expanded take on the new OR's is found in our April 8, 2010 post, The Digital Ontario Reports (Fail).

To my surprise, not much has changed since then. The weekly Ontario Reports email notices now find their way to my delete bin rather quickly.

The digital O.R.'s remain a great opportunity lost, I'm aftraid.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Gulf Oil Spill: How Bad Is It?

In the video below from Bloomberg News, oil indistry "insider" Matthew Simmons, chair of the Ocean Energy Institute and a former energy advisor to Geoerge W. Bush, postulates a very frightening assessment of the Gulf oil spill.

He asserts that independent scientific evidence now indicates the leak is currently gushing 120,000 barrels per day, and suggests an "oil lake" beneath the water could be covering as much as 40% of the entire Gulf of Mexico.

His view is that nothing short of a "small" nuclear detonation will stop the Gulf oil leak. The alternative, according to Mr. Simmons, is 120,000 barrels of oil per day leaking into the Gulf of Mexico "for the next 25 to 30 years."

I would ordinarily be hesitant to cite a view that is so "out there" on this blog (even from a credible news outlet, such as Bloomberg). Frankly, were it not for BP's consistent understatements on the severity of this leak from the outset, all proven woefull wrong, I would not have been inclined to do so.

Unfortunately, the "outliers" have been factually correct with disturbing regularity since the initial days of this catastrophe.

Let us hope that on these points, Mr. Simmons is dead wrong.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Bill 168: Ontario Workplace Harassment and Violence Legislation In Force

Bill 168, an Act to amend the Occupational Health and Safety Act with respect to violence and harassment in the workplace, comes into force today.

Our previous report on the Bill's requirements is here.

As noted by Ogilvie Renault's Mary J. Gleason and Richard J. Charney in their paper, Bill 168 - countdown to compliance and the new obligations for Ontario employers:

What are the basic obligations for employers in respect of written policies for both workplace violence and workplace harassment?

The Bill 168 amendments to OHSA require employers to develop and maintain policies that address harassment, violence and threats of violence in the workplace. Such policies must be reviewed at least annually. In workplaces of more than five employees, the policies are to be written and posted in a conspicuous place in the workplace.

What should the workplace violence and harassment policy include?

Current legislation and regulations require the workplace violence policy to:

  • Provide a mechanism for workers to report incidents or threats of workplace violence to the employer or supervisor;
  • Provide a process for the investigation of incidents, complaints or threats of workplace violence;
  • Control the risks identified in the workplace violence assessment; and
  • Set out a procedure for contracting assistance when workplace violence occurs, may occur or when threats are made.

In the video below, two Ontario Ministry of Labour workplace safety inspectors describe the requirements of the new legislation:

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Coming Soon: The Conservative Party Infomercial Channel?

Warren Kinsella is surprisingly too kind to his friend, Kory Teneycke, a Conservative party stalwart who has made application to the CRTC to bring a Fox-News style cable channel to Canada's airwaves.

Mr. Kinsella simply could have pointed out the obvious - this appears little more than a barely-veiled attempt to launch a Conservative Party infomercial channel, not a news channel at all.

No, thanks.

(Or as Don Newman succinctly put it, "the absolute last thing this country needs.")

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Tuesday, June 08, 2010

Long Island Judge Jails Mother for Parental Alienation

A New York Superior Court judge has sentenced a mother to six weekends in jail for civil contempt, finding she engaged in a pattern of alienating behaviour, including false allegations of sexual abuse, calculated to interfere with her former husband's scheduled time and relationship with their children.

Supreme Court Justice Robert A. Ross in Nassau County... held Ms. R. in civil contempt and ordered her to report to the Nassau County Correctional Facility every other weekend this summer.

Her term was to have begun on Friday, but was temporarily stayed pending appeal by a judge from the Appellate Division, 2nd Department, on Thursday.

"The evidence before me demonstrates a pattern of willful and calculated violations of the clear and express dictates of the parties' Stipulation of Settlement," Ross wrote in Lauren R. v. Ted R., 203699-02.

"The extensive record is replete with instances of attempts to undermine the relationship between the children and their father and replace him with her new husband, manipulation of defendant's parenting access, utter and unfettered vilification of the defendant to the children, false reporting of sexual misconduct without any semblance of 'good faith,' and her imposition upon the children to fear her tirades and punishment if they embrace the relationship they want to have with their father."

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG