Let me get this straight. While Quebec federal Liberals and their cronies were operating a corrupt kickback scheme and funnelling tens of millions of dollars from the public purse, Finance Minister Paul Martin, a lifelong Quebec Liberal, the highest ranking party member in the province, remained blissfully unaware of what was going on? You mean to tell me that while he was on the rubber chicken circuit, gladhanding Qubec Liberal party members, planning strategy and tactics, running the nation’s finances, this criminal activity somehow escaped his attention?

I didn’t just fall off the turnip truck. Let me offer an explanation for Judge Gomery’s conclusions on this aspect of the matter. I am speaking as one who participated as counsel in a lengthy public inquiry (APEC) and one who watched Martin’s testimony before the commission.

A commissioner of inquiry, like Judge Gomery, takes his lead from commission counsel. In this instance, counsel did not press Martin on his assertions that he knew nothing. The questions put to Martin were like lobbed softballs, not major league sliders. Any resemblance to probing cross-examination was purely coincidental.

This was to be expected. After all, would a lawyer appointed by the Martin’s federal government actually grill the sitting prime minister, let alone challenge his credibility? Not very likely.

Don’t blame Judge Gomery for his findings about Martin. The blame should fall on the inquiry system, a system that operates in such a deferential fashion in situations like this.

The Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee (VANOC) has come out swinging again over alleged infringement of its trademark rights. Having failed to dissuade the Olympia Pizza and Souvlakia House on Denman Street from using a rings and torch logo, VANOC has set its sights on an opponent closer to its own size: petroleum giant Imperial Oil Limited. It seems that Esso has an advertising campaign promoting Canada’s hockey teams and offering prizes of trips to Torino. Although no mention is made of the Olympic Games, VANOC is apparently concerned that some folks might infer that Esso is an Olympic sponsor, when in fact only Petro-Canada can claim that distinction.

It might be fun watching these two heavyweights slug it out in court, if only VANOC wasn’t spending our tax dollars on the fight.

Check out Olympia’s website at www.998denman.com:

There’s also a fuss about this:

A British Columbia Supreme Court justice has declared a mistrial in the case of a man killed by Vancouver police.

The family of Thomas Evon Stevenson had sued the City of Vancouver and two of its police officers for damages for wrongful death. The trial by judge and jury was in progress when the family’s lawyer, Cameron Ward, applied for an appropriate remedy to deal with alleged defence misconduct. On October 11, 2005, Madam Justice Boyd delivered oral reasons granting a mistrial, stating that “there is no acceptable excuse for defence counsel’s delay in producing…documents”. A new trial date has not yet been set.

…….

A coroner’s jury heard evidence about the fatal incident at the coroner’s inquest during the week of January 12-15, 2004.

On December 7, 2002, a Vancouver police officer came upon a car parked in the 400 block of East Pender Street that had been reported stolen. He disabled it, staked it out and called for assistance. When a man opened the unlocked door and got in, two police officers approached. The man ignored police commands to get out, locked the door and attempted to light a pipe with his bare hands. Moments later both officers fired a total of six bullets into the car, killing Stevenson instantly.

Some 60 Vancouver Police Department members converged on the scene and ambulances were called. The police did not tell the ambulance attendants how Stevenson had sustained his injuries.

VPD Identification Unit photographs of the scene depicted a children’s toy plastic pistol lying behind the left rear wheel of the car, metres from Stevenson’s dead body. At a VPD media briefing two days later, VPD Inspector Chris Beach stated that the replice handgun was in Stevenson’s lap or waist area before the shooting and that he had made a threatening gesture, as if to reach for it.

The VPD investigated the homicide, even though two of its members were involved. VPD Investigators did not interview any police officers, including the two who fired the shots. Those two members were not separated or taken into custody. They left work and consulted the same lawyer, who delivered prepared statements to the investigators some fifteen days later. VPD investigators did not attempt to reconstruct the incident to determine whether the explanation for the shooting was plausible. The autopsy report revealed that two bullets went through both Stevenson’s bare hands before entering his chest. The plastic gun was undamaged and did not have Stevenson’s fingerprints on it.

The coroner’s jury made the following recommendations to then Solicitor General Rich Coleman:

“1. Implement a special investigations unit similar to the SIU in Ontario, independent of the police, to investigate circumstances involving the police which result in serious injury, assault or death.

2. Circumstances involving the police which result in serious injury, assault or death be investigated by members of police investigation team independent of police force under investigation.

3. Specific protocol be developed related to the investigation of police shooting.”

None of these recommendations have been adopted.

After waiting for more than fifteen months, Robert Bagnell’s family has finally received a police summary of the police investigation into his death, which occurred on June 23, 2004 while he was in Vancouver police custody.

Vancouver Police Department Chief Constable Jamie Graham has failed to comply with the law requiring him to deliver an investigative report summary to the Bagnell family. The Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner has confirmed that the summary was due September 28, 2005 pursuant to s. 57(1) of the Police Act.

Police Complaint Commissioner Dirk Ryneveld has the final investigative report and a 75 page executive summary of it, but he is refusing to show either document to the Bagnell family.

Robert Bagnell, 44, died on June 23, 2004. The VPD initially told his family that Robert died of a drug overdose, then a month later revealed to the media that they had Tasered him twice just before he died. Another month after that, the VPD acknowledged that he was not a threat to anyone and that he was not involved in the commission of a crime when they sent an ERT (SWAT) team into the washroom Robert was in. The police said Bagnell was shocked with 50,000 volts so they could “rescue” him from a “fire” in his building. Although the family doubts these claims, they have been unable to obtain copies of police or autopsy reports and they have been unable to get an inquest scheduled, though one is mandatory.