Canadian Conservatives dealt another blow...Duffy "NOT GUILTY"

[Fearandloathing]

The results of the fall election are still fresh in the minds of Canadians, and now comes a second blow in the form of a complete exoneration of Conservative Senator Mike Duffy.

The case revolved around a $90,000 slush fund payment made to Duffy as questions about his living expenses began to grow. Duffy, a former high profile television journalist with the CBC, had maintained his innocence from the beginning, Today, after a protracted investigation by the RCMP and summer long trial, Duffy is clean.

However the judge had a lot to say about about the Conservative administration of the day, and more about Harper's PMO.

Justice Charles Vaillancourt has dismissed every charge related to Mike Duffy's residency, travel claims and expense contracting. The Crown has failed to get a single conviction for fraud, breach of trust or bribery.

Decision day for Mike Duffy: Judge dismisses every charge

The judge wrapped up his 308-page decision by making it abundantly clear the Crown failed to make its case on the bribery charges related to the $90,000 cheque from Harper's former chief of staff, Nigel Wright.

The actions of Harper's staff got a colourful condemnation from the bench. "'Could Hollywood match their deviousness?" the judge asked. "It is interesting that no one suggested doing the legal thing."

There's more 'Mind-boggling': Mike Duffy cleared on all charges as judge slams Harper PMO - Politics - CBC News

 

[JANFU]

The results of the fall election are still fresh in the minds of Canadians, and now comes a second blow in the form of a complete exoneration of Conservative Senator Mike Duffy.

The case revolved around a $90,000 slush fund payment made to Duffy as questions about his living expenses began to grow. Duffy, a former high profile television journalist with the CBC, had maintained his innocence from the beginning, Today, after a protracted investigation by the RCMP and summer long trial, Duffy is clean.

However the judge had a lot to say about about the Conservative administration of the day, and more about Harper's PMO.

Afternoon F&L
This can be laid at Harper's feet, but the Liberals are equally complicit in the lack of rules for the Senate, and I also include Parliament and MP's spending and oversight.
Justin now has a tremendous opportunity handed to him.
As there are no Liberal Senators, the Party IIRC does have a Senate Liberal leader who represents the Govt.
It is well past time to open this bag of corruption and clean it.
All spending public.
All contracts thru a Senate office.
All contracts open and public
No funding or reimbursement or senators for events that are a sole to benefit the Party.
Senators must reside and have resided in the Province - min time limit running into years where they have resided in that prov-, no more get around as was done with Duffy and others.
That is just to start.

 

[SocialD]

The results of the fall election are still fresh in the minds of Canadians, and now comes a second blow in the form of a complete exoneration of Conservative Senator Mike Duffy.

The case revolved around a $90,000 slush fund payment made to Duffy as questions about his living expenses began to grow. Duffy, a former high profile television journalist with the CBC, had maintained his innocence from the beginning, Today, after a protracted investigation by the RCMP and summer long trial, Duffy is clean.

However the judge had a lot to say about about the Conservative administration of the day, and more about Harper's PMO.

I don't know if there are ethical differences for judges in Canada from the USA ( per the law that is ) but this judges comments, while they might be on track to what people might think are, well I didn't think part of the job of a judge was tabloid speculation.

 

[JANFU]

I don't know if there are ethical differences for judges in Canada from the USA ( per the law that is ) but this judges comments, while they might be on track to what people might think are, well I didn't think part of the job of a judge was tabloid speculation.

Do Judges in the US provide reasoning for their decisions - Innocent or Guilty?

 

[Grand Mal]

The results of the fall election are still fresh in the minds of Canadians, and now comes a second blow in the form of a complete exoneration of Conservative Senator Mike Duffy.

The case revolved around a $90,000 slush fund payment made to Duffy as questions about his living expenses began to grow. Duffy, a former high profile television journalist with the CBC, had maintained his innocence from the beginning, Today, after a protracted investigation by the RCMP and summer long trial, Duffy is clean.

However the judge had a lot to say about about the Conservative administration of the day, and more about Harper's PMO.

I haven't been paying close attention to this but I remember having the suspicion, at the time it first saw the light of day, that Nigel Wright had been tossed under the bus.

 

[SocialD]

Do Judges in the US provide reasoning for their decisions - Innocent or Guilty?

Yes, but .. I don't recall seeing things like "'Could Hollywood match their deviousness?"

 

[JANFU]

Yes, but .. I don't recall seeing things like "'Could Hollywood match their deviousness?"

If you were up on the shenanigans, direct influence within a separate House of govt to subvert investigations, then you would agree. Parliament cannot interfere as they did, nor can the PMO Staffers with the Senate.
It was a keystone cops enterprise.

 

[SocialD]

If you were up on the shenanigans, direct influence within a separate House of govt to subvert investigations, then you would agree. Parliament cannot interfere as they did, nor can the PMO Staffers with the Senate.
It was a keystone cops enterprise.

LIke I said it might be totally true and right. I just hadn't seen a judge, other than like a peoples court type of thing, say stuff like that.

 

[JANFU]

LIke I said it might be totally true and right. I just hadn't seen a judge, other than like a peoples court type of thing, say stuff like that.

Basically the Govt, PMO and Staffers lied and tried to cover it up. What they did is a serious interference with another Govt house. Glad though that this has come out, many knew of the corruption, now the facts are out, and we will wait to see what the PM does, not only with the Senate, but with Parliament as well.

 

[SocialD]

Basically the Govt, PMO and Staffers lied and tried to cover it up. What they did is a serious interference with another Govt house. Glad though that this has come out, many knew of the corruption, now the facts are out, and we will wait to see what the PM does, not only with the Senate, but with Parliament as well.

Well I'm definitely pro transparency.

 

[Fearandloathing]

I don't know if there are ethical differences for judges in Canada from the USA ( per the law that is ) but this judges comments, while they might be on track to what people might think are, well I didn't think part of the job of a judge was tabloid speculation.

Had you actually read it, he was citing hard evidence. His ruling is being heralded as a triumph of justice over a corrupt PMO

 

[Fearandloathing]

I haven't been paying close attention to this but I remember having the suspicion, at the time it first saw the light of day, that Nigel Wright had been tossed under the bus.

That would be very correct. When the $90,000 payment came to light, Harper fired him say he had no knowledge.

As per your earlier post, I have a feeling that Trudeau is leading up to some kind of reform. I suspect it is back burner as he's got a very full plate, but I have an idea he will build on kicking the senate out of the caucus. It will be interesting to see as he goes about filling senate vacancies....it would be great irony if Duffy were to sit as an independent with the Liberals

 

[Fearandloathing]

Yes, but .. I don't recall seeing things like "'Could Hollywood match their deviousness?"

What's your problem with it? He is making a point for **** sakes and is using a language that will get attention in a case of corruption.

Do you censor judges in the Excited States?

 

[SocialD]

What's your problem with it? He is making a point for **** sakes and is using a language that will get attention in a case of corruption.

Do you censor judges in the Excited States?

It just sounds like .. well it sounds like what I said.. tabloid speculation. that's all I'm saying.

 

[Fearandloathing]

It just sounds like .. well it sounds like what I said.. tabloid speculation. that's all I'm saying.

Probably because you are ignorant of the background of the case and the activities of the people involved, a Prime Minister and his Chief of staff. Yes it is an unusual and yes it it strong.

Had you researched the background of the senate expenses scandal, Harper's actions you might understand how three years of controversy and headlines have led to a strongly worded decision from judge.
'
With things like the OJ Simpson and others in the US I can understand how you would see at 'tabloid' since that's what your court system has become

 

[Middleground]

If the Liberals do not bring forth reforms to Parliament and Senate spending/claims, then I will be seriously ticked. Lets see if they have the guts to give up some pork because the day and age of a government trough should be long over.

 

[Grant]

If the Liberals do not bring forth reforms to Parliament and Senate spending/claims, then I will be seriously ticked. Lets see if they have the guts to give up some pork because the day and age of a government trough should be long over.

Perhaps the "idea of a government trough should be all over" but that's unlikely, given that 'austerity' has now been put aside. The Canadian government can now spend how much it wants on whatever it wants with whomever it wants, similar to Obama's investments in the US. His father did much the same and it wasn't until the 1990's that the country began some fiscal responsibility.

I see little difference in Canadians and Americans in their attitudes toward 'fiscal responsibility'. They occasionally just talk the talk.

Trudeau's Approach Puts Canada In Global Anti-Austerity Club

 

[calm]

When someone from the Ruling Class end up in a courtroom, the litmus test of "Evidence" is claimed to be "Burden Of Proof".

When someone from the Lower Class appears in a courtroom, the litmus test of "Evidence" is "Common Sense".

I would think that a majority of court cases are presented as "Circumstantial Evidence" and the judge/jury is expected to use their "Common Sense" to reach a verdict.

Common Sense tells me that Duffy was guilty, but for the Ruling Class the standard of proof is almost impossible to meet.

Calm