Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
140-Statement-From-TPS.pdf

140-Statement-From-TPS.pdf

Ratings: (0)|Views: 0 |Likes:
Published by Paisley Rae
140-Statement-From-TPS.pdf
140-Statement-From-TPS.pdf

More info:

Published by: Paisley Rae on Dec 10, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/16/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Your
 
email
 
of
 
February
 
6,
 
2011,
 
setting
 
out
 
the
 
terms
 
of
 
your
 
story,
 
was
 
full
 
of
 
mistakes.
 
It
 
confirms,
 
 beyond
 
any
 
doubt,
 
that
 
you’ve
 
made
 
up
 
your
 
minds
 
long
 
 before
 
you
 
contacted
 
various
 
police
 
services
 
for
 
their
 
reaction,
 
explanation
 
or
 
comments.
 
It
 
is
 
clear
 
that
 
you
 
fail,
 
comprehensively,
 
to
 
understand
 
the
 
court
 
process.
 
You
 
fail
 
to
 
understand
 
the
 
role
 
of
 
the
 
 judge,
 
you
 
fail
 
to
 
understand
 
the
 
nature
 
of
 
a
 
trial,
 
you
 
fail
 
to
 
understand
 
the
 
obligations
 
of,
 
and
 
options
 
available
 
to,
 
 judges,
 
criminal
 
lawyers
 
and
 
crown
 
prosecutors.
 
Your
 
most
 
serious
 
error,
 
highlighted
 
repeatedly
 
in
 
your
 
email,
 
is
 
that
 
you
 
either
 
don’t
 
understand,
 
or
 
you
 
don’t
 
want
 
your
 
readers
 
to
 
understand,
 
the
 
fundamental
 
distinction
 
 between
 
a
 
 judge’s
 
comments
 
and
 
a
 
 judge’s
 
rulings.
 
Without
 
an
 
understanding
 
of
 
such
 
a
 
 basic
 
point,
 
your
 
story
 
cannot
 
 be
 
taken
 
seriously.
 
A
 
 judge
 
can
 
comment
 
on
 
anything
 
he
 
or
 
she
 
wishes.
 
Such
 
comment,
 
however,
 
does
 
not
 
amount
 
to
 
a
 
finding
 
of
 
guilt.
 
A
 
 judge
 
may
 
feel
 
that
 
a
 
witness
 
is
 
lying,
 
 but
 
until
 
that
 
witness
 
is
 
charged,
 
tried
 
and
 
convicted,
 
he
 
or
 
she
 
has
 
not
 
 been
 
convicted
 
of
 
perjury.
 
You
 
submitted
 
a
 
number
 
of
 
cases
 
to
 
us
 
for
 
comment.
 
Nowhere
 
on
 
that
 
list
 
was
 
a
 
case
 
which
 
destroys
 
your
 
preconceived
 
ideas.
 
Was
 
that
 
a
 
deliberate
 
omission?
 
Or
 
was
 
it
 
the
 
result
 
of
 
sloppy
 
research?
 
Her
 
 Majesty
 
the
 
Queen
 
and
 
Nicholas
 
Ebanks
 
was
 
decided
 
on
 
 June
 
20,
 
2007.
 
As
 
you
 
reported
 
the
 
next
 
day,
 
“An
 
alleged
 
member
 
of
 
east
 
Toronto’s
 
feared
 
Versace
 
Crew
 
street
 
gang
 
has
 
 been
 
acquitted
 
of
 
attempted
 
murder
 
and
 
conspiracy
 
to
 
commit
 
murder
 
after
 
a
 
 judge
 
tossed
 
out
 
wiretap
 
evidence
 
against
 
him,
 
saying
 
it
 
was
 
obtained
 
with
 
a
 
“reckless
 
disregard
 
for
 
the
 
truth.”
 
 Justice
 
Brian
 
Trafford
 
was
 
sharply
 
critical
 
of
 
the
 
police
 
and
 
a
 
crown
 
agent…”
 
Star
 
readers
 
were
 
never
 
told
 
the
 
decision
 
was
 
appealed.
 
They
 
were
 
left
 
with
 
the
 
clear
 
impression
 
of
 
serious
 
misbehaviour
 
 by
 
a
 
named
 
police
 
officer.
 
The
 
case
 
was
 
appealed
 
to
 
the
 
Court
 
of
 
Appeal
 
for
 
Ontario.
 
Mr.
 
 Justice
 
Trafford’s
 
decision
 
was
 
overturned
 
in
 
a
 
3
0
 
decision,
 
written
 
 by
 
Mr.
 
 Justice
 
MacPherson,
 
released
 
on
 
December
 
2,
 
2009.
 
The
 
unanimous
 
decision
 
of
 
the
 
Court
 
of
 
Appeal
 
was
 
sharply
 
critical
 
of
 
Mr.
 
 Justice
 
Trafford’s
 
decision,
 
overruling
 
him
 
on
 
a
 
 
number
 
of
 
key
 
issues
 
that
 
are
 
at
 
the
 
heart
 
of
 
your
 
story.
 
Your
 
readers
 
were
 
never
 
made
 
aware
 
of
 
this
 
decision.
 
They
 
may
 
wonder
 
why.
 
Mr.
 
 Justice
 
MacPherson
 
notes
 
that,
 
“In
 
a
 
317
paragraph
 
ruling,
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge
 
sharply
 
criticized
 
Detective
 
Kyriacou...He
 
stated
 
that
 
‘Detective
 
Kyriacou’s
 
preparation
 
of
 
this
 
affidavit
 
amounted
 
to
 
a
 
reckless
 
disregard
 
for
 
the
 
truth
 
and
 
for
 
the
 
role
 
of
 
the
 
 judge..’”
 
Mr.
 
 Justice
 
MacPherson
 
went
 
on
 
to
 
say,
 
“Though
 
they
 
vary
 
in
 
their
 
wording,
 
several
 
of
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge’s
 
comments
 
generally
 
asserted
 
some
 
degree
 
of
 
 bad
 
faith
 
or
 
impropriety
 
on
 
the
 
part
 
of
 
the
 
police
 
affiant….
In
 
my
 
view,
 
these
 
 findings
 
constitute
 
either
 
 palpable
 
and
 
overriding
 
errors
 
of 
 
 fact
 
or
 
legal
 
errors
.”
 
Mr.
 
 Justice
 
MacPherson
 
said,
 
In
 
none
 
of 
 
these
 
instances
 
did
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge
 
support
 
these
 
 findings
 
directly
 
with
 
evidence
 
of 
 
the
 
affiant’s
 
conduct,
 
competence,
 
or
 
 professionalism
.
 
Some
 
comments
 
were
 
made
 
with
 
simple
 
reference
 
to
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge’s
 
several
 
findings
 
that
 
the
 
affiant
 
omitted
 
or
 
misstated
 
material
 
information
 ,
 
while
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge
 
 provided
 
no
 
support
 
in
 
the
 
evidence
 
 for
 
other
 
comments.
 
The
 
Court
 
of
 
Appeal
 
concluded
 
that
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge’s
 
 findings
 
of 
 
omissions
 
and
 
misstatements
 
are
 
insufficient
 
bases
 
 for
 
his
 
critical
 
comments.”
 
On
 
another
 
key
 
point,
 
they
 
said,
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge
 
misunderstood
 
either
 
the
 
evidence
 
or
 
its
 
materiality
.”
 
Mr.
 
 Justice
 
MacPherson
 
concluded
 ,
 
“In
 
my
 
view,
 
the
 
 findings
 
that
 
commented
 
critically
 
on
 
the
 
affiant’s
 
conduct
 
were
 
 palpable
 
and
 
overriding
 
errors
 
that
 
directly
 
affected
 
the
 
trial
 
 judge’s
 
Charter
 
analysis.”
 
Your
 
email
 
showed
 
no
 
awareness
 
of,
 
or
 
interest
 
in,
 
the
 
roles
 
played
 
 by
 
 judges,
 
criminal
 
lawyers
 
and
 
crown
 
prosecutors.
 
A
 
crown
 
prosecutor
 
who
 
has
 
reason
 
to
 
 believe
 
a
 
criminal
 
offence
 
is
 
 being
 
committed
 
must
 
take
 
action
 
and
 
report
 
those
 
concerns
 
to
 
police.
 
A
 
criminal
 
lawyer
 
who
 
has
 
reason
 
to
 
 believe
 
a
 
criminal
 
offence
 
is
 
 being
 
committed
 
may
 
not
 
have
 
a
 
legal
 
obligation
 
 but
 
certainly
 
has
 
a
 
moral
 
and
 
ethical
 
obligation
 
to
 
report
 
those
 
concerns
 
to
 
police.
 
A
 
 judge
 
who
 
has
 
reason
 
to
 
 believe
 
a
 
criminal
 
offence
 
is
 
 being
 
committed
 
has
 
a
 
number
 
of
 
options,
 
not
 
least
 
of
 
which
 
is
 
requesting
 
the
 

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->