Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Thoughts on the Rahim Jaffer story.

A couple of thoughts on the Rahim Jaffer story from yesterday.

First off, Anita Neville or anyone else too stupid not to know the difference between what is a Provincial and a Federal matter, the entire thing was handled by the authorities of Ontario. He was stopped by the OPP, was prosecuted by the Ontario Crown, and judged by an Ontario appointee to the bench. The federal government had absolutely nothing to do with it, so if you are having issues take it up with the Liberal Premier of Ontario who actually has some say into how things are done in his province.

Next the cocaine charge along with the impaired driving charges were dropped by the Ontario Crown Prosecutor. Why, we don't know, but the charges were dropped and the matter is settled as far as the law is concerned. I say this because I have noticed more than a few comments in various places that don't just border on libel, they flat out jump right into it. If Rahim needs some help paying for his lawyer bills it wouldn't be hard today to find a few people for that very same lawyer to extract some easy money from with a libel suit or 2.

We do not know the reasons why the charges were dropped, and I hope an expanded explanation is forthcoming, but everything else to this point about why it happened is nothing but pure speculation. If the cops, the lab, or even the prosecution screwed up is unknown. If something was dropped in order to get a guilty plea or some other kind of deal was made is also unknown, but plea deals are very common and listening to the left you might be led to believe that this deal (if there even was one) is somehow as damaging to Canadian justice as the Karla Homolka deal was.

He plead guilty to reckless driving and the last time I checked that does not usually result in jail time. All of this running around pointing fingers and crying hypocrisy is nothing more than an attempt to gain some political capital on a news story, and an ironic one at that coming from the hug a thug left. Rahim Jaffer is now a private citizen and the opposition should be careful if playing this game. If they want to open up that big Pandora's box where spouses become fair game I hope that they are prepared for what might happen and don't run around playing the victim if it does. Heaven forbid that Zsuzsanna Zsohar ever get a speeding ticket or worse. BTW is Zsuzsanna Zsohar even a Canadian citizen, and if she isn't would the same crowd that is running around today condemning Jaffer suggest that she be deported if she was in Rahim's place? Somehow I doubt that very much.

More games from a party that doesn't care who they smear if they see some gain out of it.

Update: A couple of stories from Feb 23 that everyone seems to have missed.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

The judge is an appointed Tory, the prosecution is muffled, and this looks bad from start to finish. If the tribe doesn't stop screwing up there will be no conservative majority. (real conservative)

Anonymous said...

I don't believe party connections matter. Jaffer's case is another example of the elite of Ottawa looking after each other. Check out the BS sentences the adscam thieves got away with. This is what happens when we get a bunch of lawyers "making deals" to allow easier collection of their exorbitant fees.
Plea bargaining should be removed from the "LEGAL SYSTEM".

Rob C

Alberta Girl said...

Did either of your anony's actually READ AA's post...cause given your comments either you didn't or you don't have a very good capability to understand the written word.

This has nothing to do with the Federal government. Pay attention boys.

Bec said...

Good post, AA and very timely. I for one would love to see a few of the people making presumptuous and libelous comments, downsized a wee bit.
Just because they want something to be true, doesn't make it so. Just because something was reported a certain way in a media report doesn't make that person guilty.
I have no idea one way or the other but to suggest interference and favoritism for a private citizen is seriously irresponsible.
To link him to the Federal government and Conservative party, extremely childish.

Indeed, those that have made this a federal issue because of who HE WAS and who his spouse IS had better hope that Conservatives have more class than they do should they ever find themselves in the same circumstance.
A few names from the past, come to mind.

CanadianSense said...

I am enjoying the left chasing and showing outrage on the failure of this individual because of his past political position.

Why do the Left do not treat the Bryant matter in equal outrage?

How many in the left blogged about the Quebec Liberal who was home for Christmas holidays after being convicted for his part in Adscam?

This is another reason why Canadians are cynical and believe in the favouritism, double standards, elitism exists from all political parties.

tony and michy said...

A Tory is a Tory is a Tory....The Elitist got you fooled into thinking well thats provincial not federal so it can't happen...Come on Sheeple think for yourselves!!!!

Tony J
Vancouver

Polyorchnid Octopunch said...

All I can say is... if I got pulled over for doubling the speed limit, stank of booze, blew over, and a subsequent search found coke, I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't be getting off with a 500$ fine and the serious charges dropped. And I'm not even brown.

Alright for me but not for thee seems to be the m.o. of those folks. Just like his wife at the airport, or his wife's boss at parliament. Lame lame lame lame lame.

Oh, Alberta Girl, if "It's the province, stoopid" is true for this rankly obvious bit of classist favouritism, it's equally true for the adscam folks, and you can't possibly blame Martin and the federal liberals for it, amiright?

And Canadian Sense, Canadians can in fact distinguish between people who work the system, and those who simply wish to defy the people as represented by the institution of Parliament. Cabinet is the Crown and Parliament is the people in a westminster parliamentary system like, you know, we have in Canada, and that's why Parliament is supreme... because the People are sovereign over the Crown. Right now the People want to know if in fact the Crown deliberately handed people in Afghanistan over to be tortured, because if that's the case then we need a new Crown, and fast. The longer Harper dances to try to escape the sovereignty of the people, the guiltier he looks... and given that at this point it's up to at least a full quarter of dancing including pulling the trigger on Canada's nuclear option for the PM... he looks pretty guilty. So yeah... they don't all look the same. After all, you can say a lot about Martin, but he never cooked the books like Flaherty did in his last term as Finance Minister in Ontario.

CanadianSense said...

PO,

You can cite anything you want. The majority of MP's need to stop talking and stand up and ACT.

a) If they believe Colvin than they are turning a blind eye by voting confidence in this gov't.

Since 2006 the opposition have NEVER voted non-confidence. They just pretend to be angry.

In January 2009 what did the Liberals do?

In September 2009 NDP?

I keep hearing excuses from the Liberals, NDP supporters.

Martin said...

I don't recall Liberals and the media being outraged when Margaret Kemper sucessfully fought an impaired driving charge in Ont. in 2005. Granted, she was prosecuted and the charges against her were not as serious as Jaffer faced. Still, the crown chose not to appeal; the PM at the time muat have been Paul Martin. Then as now, any connection between the federal justice ministry, and the Ont. crown prosecuting system was non existent.

Anonymous said...

It was a plea bargain folks get over it
a plea bargain is done with lawyers not the Judge

I suspect the police did a search and seizure without legal authority

let's pass the crime bills and get some muscle into the
legal system

fh

wilson said...

Oh please,
if you can afford a good lawyer,
and it is your first offence,
and the evidence is in the least bit shakey,
and you are otherwise an upstanding citizen,
you too, Mr Average Guy, would take home a $500 plea bargain fine too.

Here in Canada, plead guilty to terrorism charges, say you are sorry,
and you get sentenced to ONE day in jail.

Ardvark said...

Oh damn right it looks bad ,but to believe that the McGuinty government is involved in a conspiracy to get a former CPC MP off is venturing into foil hat land.

Crap like this happens everyday in our justice system, just go over to Neo's if you want a list of bad sentences and the lefties normal response. The only difference this time is the lefty outrage over the guy charged; which is odd considering their thoughts on Omar Khadr who they do not want to face justice.


BTW hard core lefties, go ahead and prove the conspiracy. If successful you will not only bring down both the federal and Ontario governments in the process you will also bring down the courts and Canadian Justice system and then you would be 3 very big steps closer to that anarchy thing you are so fond of, but you do need to prove it first. Good luck with that.

Anonymous said...

Absolutely not true Wilson, I know someone personally that the day before this on March 8, 2010 was sentenced guilty and has lost their license for a further 12 months and fined $1000.00 and was told THIS WAS THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM they could do for someone on first offence with a pristeen driving record of over 40 years! Except of course if you're Rahim Jaffer.

Ardvark said...

Anon @ 10:03. You know someone convicted of reckless driving that "lost their license for a further 12 months and fined $1000.00" ?

I doubt it.

Bec said...

Anony @10:03am

"sentenced guilty" or pleaded guilty? You provide NO CONTEXT for this circumstance that you refer to.
For example, did it cause an accident, were there injuries, was the individual convicted of impaired driving?

As I have said previously, saying it doesn't make it provable. It must be provable and I can give you many examples of unprovable charges that did not stick.

These were not politicians or big wigs, they were every day Joe's that had charges laid that could not be proven.

Those the laws and if you don't like them, then support stiffer sentences but in the case of provincial jurisdictions as is the case with traffic laws and impairment laws, the facts are the facts.

Ardvark said...

Bec, I am as surprised as you are at the amount of support from the left for the CPC and its tough on crime strategy.


Oh wait......

Anonymous said...

Well, no matter who this is about, one thing is clear.

The outcome definitely shows that the laws need to be made tougher!

Ardvark said...

We could have the death penalty for possession of cocaine but it would not matter if the charges are dropped by the Crown.


The OPP stands behind its investigation. http://www.inews880.com/Channels/Reg/LocalNews/story.aspx?ID=1205249

The ball is in your court (pardon the pun) Chris Bentley, Ontario's Attorney General.

David Wozney said...

The word “Crown”, referred to above, refers to the “Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”.

The provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick expressed their desire to be federally united into one Dominion under the Crown of the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland”, not the Crown of the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, according to the British North America Act, 1867.

Patrick Ross said...

As it turns out, Jaffer the search that turned up the 'caine was illegally done.

The cop screwed up, so Jaffer gets to walk on that.

It's not right, but it's what the law requires. Hopefully Jaffer will get some help and this cop will get his arse kicked.