Charter Rights and Red Lights

I know, I'm a geek, I like to rhyme.

I wonder how far this will get?

Lawyer challenges traffic stop
Star Phoenix

*** EDITED: AHAHAHAHA - The title for this was originally "Charter Rights and Traffic Lights" ... little innocent me, when I first read the article saw "blowing through" a red light ... not "blowing a red light" ... so funny, and so NOT THE SAME THING.

Sigh. Not helping the reputation of lawyers out there ... I can back up a valid Charter claim ... but I feel like ... if you blow a red ... and you were driving ... hmmm. BUT again, we don't know the back story here ... I guess there could be one?

Where I'm At

I've been feeling reflective about this semester already, but I know I should wait until all my exams are done to really get into it (i.e. I should save my brain power for the exams).

Wrote Debtor-Creditor on Saturday, and I'm not sure how I feel about it. Tough thing about Debtor-Creditor is that there are so many rules, that choosing how to apply them was kinda hard - I felt like I applied logic and case law to apply rules to facts, but there were a few different ways I could have sliced the rules, so no matter what I chose to do it FELT LIKE I could in theory justify it.

YIKES.

I'm sad that class is over, though. I liked it. It was very procedural, algorithmic always. The techy in me was happy. Also - Prof was amazing. Professor Cummings is ... amazing. REALLY enjoyed his class, he broke things down in a structured and complete way, he respected all of the students, and answered questions to lift the confusion. I'll definitely take more classes from Cummings.

A good tip I heard the other day is that, as Cummings teaches both Debtor-Creditor law and Secured Transactions ... and because the material is related ... if you take them both together in the same semester, it's a bit confusing to write exams and remember which material is for which class. Luckily, I didn't take Secured Transactions this semester - but a good tip for anyone that is in first year right now ... for next year.

I write Evidence tomorrow, and I'm not too sure about this one. Luther did give us some tutorials with TAs at the end of the semester, which were SOOOOOO helpful. I'm studying a bit differently for this test, as I've heard that Luther likes breadth over depth ... so ... hopefully I've not been led astray.

That's one thing that I've noticed about this year. I've really had to change my studying habits for a few classes; material is a bit different, Profs are a bit different, and I'm trying not to drive myself absolutely CRAZY. We'll see how it all shakes out for the marks.

My reflective attitude wants to talk about the overall experience this semester, but I'll save that until the winter break.

Also - after the Debtor-Creditor exam, I hit Maguires with some classmates for some food and a beer (or 3 ..... ahem). There was a GREAT debate about the Latimer parole decision. Some really great points of view, some really great perspectives, and some really personal reflections on what this all means. Again - a subject worthy of its own post, so it'll have to wait until after exams. Sigh.

P.S. My pre-New Year's resolution is to finally pay attention to when I'm using "it's" and "its" properly ... I KNOW the difference - it's = contraction for it is, its = possessive ... but I pretty much just never pay attention.

Anyhoo - time to go make Evidence come together in a meaningful way. Wish me luck.

We Took a Look at This News Item in Health Law

Interesting ... I can't wait to see the outcome of this.

Jury mulls tubal ligation injury case by: Chris Purdy, the Star Phoenix

Baert's bowel was unknowingly perforated during the laparoscopic operation in July 1999, allowing toxins to leak into her body. She was discharged from hospital but two days later was rushed back in critical condition, suffering from septic shock.
Doctors in Edmonton later had to amputate her hands and feet. She also suffered major brain damage during cardiac arrests, leaving her with the mental capacity of a child.

Now 29, she lives in Saskatoon's Parkridge Centre long-term care home where staff change her diapers and feed her.

Along with her husband Mark and their two young sons, Baert is suing Graham for more than $10 million for negligence. The Lloydminster hospital and several nurses originally named in the suit have already settled out of court.

Glazer told the all-female jury that bowel perforations are recognized risks of tubal ligation operations.

All-female jury, hunh? Sounds interesting ... from that point alone.

I Spent Last Night with Evidence

We have a love/hate relationship right now, Evidence and I. We're never really sure where the other one stands.

Luckily, I've absorbed enough to recognize the controversy over the evidential burden that seems to be highlighted in this article:

Supreme Court reinstates conviction of landlord Grover by: Betty Ann Adam, Starphoenix.com

The guilty verdict was overturned when two of three appeal court judges ruled that a properly instructed jury could have found that Grover's conduct was equally consistent with the conclusion that he didn't know the inspection had not been done and simply thought it was crucial that the inspection records be in perfect order.

Looks like the evidential burden test meets the rule in Hodge's Case - although, from the article I can't tell if this case was only based on circumstantial evidence, so I don't know if the Court actually tried to apply the rule or if the Court was just using Hodge's Case language. There has been some debate about whether a certain Supreme Court of Canada case (Charemski) resurrects the rule in Hodge's Case - I wonder if in the body of the judgment, the SCC will explicitly deal with this (IF it was an application of the rule in Hodge's Case).

"Where the accused testified and offered an explanation for his or her actions, which the trial judge rejected, it was not open to the Court of Appeal to acquit on the basis or speculation about a different possible explanation of conduct that was flatly contradicted by the accused's own testimony," the decision, handed down Thursday, states.

I'll bet this case will be in the next round of Evidence casebooks. Of course, it will be interesting to read the actual judgment, since the media report could have gotten it wrong - hmmm ... once I get a minute to breathe, I'll have to take a look-see.

Oh Bus-Org, How You Rear Your Head

I was skimming the Precedent, and came across this article:

Executive couples must be careful to keep confidences
Vulnerable to charges of insider trading
by: Vern Krishna, Financial Post

Caught my eye, because our Bus-Org prof always jokes (kind of) with us ... "if you're going to act opportunistically ... ESPECIALLY DON'T TELL YOUR SPOUSE"

Here's a quote from the article:

An "insider" is a director, officer or senior employee of a corporation. A trade is improper where an insider buys or sells the corporation's securities based on material confidential information "Insider" also includes "tippees" -- individuals who receive improper information from insiders.

Typically, insiders have privileged access to confidential information that is not available to the general investing public. Thus, in a sense, they are fiduciaries responsible for the management of corporate information in the best interests of the corporation. That is the theory.

Unfortunately, that is not the theory. Insiders have fiduciary obligation because they have limited access to corporate resources that they could opportunistically divert. Fiduciary is not a best-interest obligation, it is the obligation not to act in your own interests without permission.

The article gets it right here, though:

It is improper, however, to use confidential information for personal profit or to pass the information on to friends.

The rest of the article has some good points too.

Ah ... Bus-Org ... how you creep into every facet of my life. Here I was, just trying to skim some legal gossip ... sigh.

We Haven't Gone There Yet

Haven't breached the Charter issues in our Evidence class yet (not sure if we do ... I'd have to dig out my syllabus ... and it's still pre-coffee hour in my house) ... now my interest is piqued:

Judges urged to exercise restraint
Anti-Charter 'chainsaws' lubricated
By Helen Burnett - LawTimes

Saskatchewan Has Been Talking About Tasers ...

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2007/10/09/tasers-saskatchewan.html

Hopefully, it doesn't come to this kind of scary-ness:
http://ualbertalaw.typepad.com/faculty/2007/10/casual-taser-us.html

Are you as sick as I am after reading this? I'm nauseous.

Made it Through Another Week

Don't have a lot of time, but a few things:

Mom and Dad are coming to visit today (woo hoo) ... so that is super exciting.

I think the Precedent Effect (as I've dubbed it) is more widespread that they (or anyone) originally thought. From what I can see, there's now a race to "reach out" to young lawyers in a hip, modern way. From calls for young bloggers from the CBA, to the effects that are documented on the Precedent blog ... could this be the first step in addressing what I've been reading about all summer (namely the archaic firm model that most law firms are still using for operation)? There was a lot of material over the summer about retaining women and people with families by restructuring the way that law firms work. Interesting ...

FINALLY ...

HAPPY BIRTHDAY CAROLYN!!

Bridging the Gap

Like I've been saying!

Privacy by Design at the Privacy Commissioner's Blog

I Want a Copy!

A blog I've been following for awhile, The Precedent, is releasing a print version!

I want one.

Precedent launches print edition Oct 19

I Couldn't Agree More

Surfed U of A's Faculty of Law Blog today, and loved this post, where Nancy Grace is referred to as a "poisonous windbag".

LOVE. IT.

http://ualbertalaw.typepad.com/faculty/2007/10/plus-equals-thr.html

I've read a bit about Nancy Grace before, since I saw her on Jeopardy and couldn't get over her performance. Her past debacles are worth a read, if you're ever bored and in search of entertainment ... but I warn ... they did cause an elevation in my blood pressure at times.

Interesting Article for the Wills Students

Canadian Lawyer Magazine has this article:

Power of attorney protection breaks down across borders
By Judy Van Rhijn

A scary prospect, since I've seen many elderly relocations (from one Province to another) due NOT to the "fight over the body before it's dead" that Ian Hull, of Hull and Hull LLP in Toronto is quoted as saying in the article, but due to the fact that relatives are in another province, and relocation is necessary as the requirement for care escalates; I think this is a key issue for so many people ... even if they're not fighting over this ... but just in trying to take care of affairs.

Nice to see that SK is taking a leadership role on this issue, though! Props to SK for being the only province to ratify the Hague Convention 35 so far!!

What's Your Claim to Fame?

Lorne Matthew Lapoleon's claim to fame is that he's the first person in Canada to be charged with perpetrating a terrorist hoax.

Here's the article from The Province:

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=bd571c9e-3a3a-43ba-9ca6-765075641f05

Not sure that I have a claim to fame ... so I'm jealous on that front ... but not that it's this particular claim to fame. I'd like something a little more .... artsy or something, as mine.

Yikes.

Professional Misconduct

It's a subject that I've been studying in my Health Law class, as it applies to Health Care Professionals.

In Law Times this article was posted:
Guelph lawyer disbarred by law society
Could lose Order of Canada

I only point this article out, because although I've come to see how serious the implications are of professional misconduct, I didn't realize you could lose your Order of Canada (which makes sense, of course, when you think about it).

I look forward (even more now) to next semester, as I'm enrolled in Professional Responsibility. Professional misconduct as it relates to lawyers will provide an interesting contrast to how it works for the doctors that I've been studying (the thought of which reminds me of a thread I read awhile back on lawstudents.ca).

Here's the calendar description:

LAW 421.3 — 1/2(3L)
Professional Responsibility
Introduces students to i) the roles, responsibilities and authority of the legal profession and ii)the legal and ethical duties of lawyers in the practice of law. The regulation of various aspects of the profession - admission, regulation of the practice of law, lawyer discipline, etc. are critically examined. As well, students will learn the elements of a lawyer’s duties to client, the court and others, including himself or herself. This involves an understanding of the lawyer’s role in the adversary system, the nature of lawyer-client confidentiality, integrity and conflicts of interest in various roles performed by lawyers.

Perhaps It's Best ...

... that I didn't get my transfer to U of C after all.

I was surfing through the Motion to Recess blog, and stumbled upon this article:
Maclean's Law School Rankings Cause a Buzz

According to Maclean's first ever law school rankings (and yeah, I'm still kinda mad at MacLean's too, but I really think that holding a grudge is unhealthy ... I'm trying to move on):

http://www.macleans.ca/downloads/20070924_proschools_law_intro.pdf

U of S Law school comes in at #10 (out of 16 common law schools).

U of C Law School comes in at #15 (out of 16 common law schools).

The controversy surrounding the university rankings that Maclean's puts out is well known, but it's an interesting look-see in any case.

This Article Caught My Eye

In the Star Phoenix this morning:

Crown prosecutor wants top court to hear appeal
http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/story.html?id=5b948f4a-6ac0-43a4-ac55-ab649c94b73a

Brings up some interesting issues, but caught my eye because this case was one of the cases that was included in the research for my open memo/moot last year. Really brings home the point that the cases that we work with are like living, breathing entities that are always changing.

Exciting.

This Is What My Prof Meant

One thing I remember my Constitutional Law Prof saying is that as law students, we should hope to be better at interpreting the law than the media is.

Here's a story on the CBC website:

Convicted hit-and-run driver granted full parole
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/08/29/bc-hitandrun.html

A man convicted of a hit and run that killed a tourist in Vancouver gained full parole Tuesday after serving less than five months of his sentence.

I urge you to read the rest of the article by following the link above (it isn't very long).

NOW ... when you look at the actual case as posted on CANLII, it says that the victim in this case was crossing the street at an intersection against the lights, and that witnesses testified to the fact that there did not appear to be any dangerous driving, and that likely the accused was trying to SWERVE TO AVOID the pedestrians crossing the street illegally.

If you read through the case there is a huge psychological component for the accused that explains why he fled the scene, and even goes on to say that the accused was at one time diagnosed with a case of high functioning autism.

NOT exactly the story that you get from CBC, non?

CBC seems to feel that it is very important to highlight that Zhang is an immigrant, although a Canadian citizen. Why? My guess is that they're mongering some kind of response here. In the case, it reads that Zhang came to Canada when he was 7. Why is this piece of information relevant? Your guess is as good as mine.

Tragic, that in a case like this, the media puts out an article painting the big evil driver killing a pedestrian, and the failing justice system that lets him out without doing enough time. Can't you picture him cackling like the Joker while walking away from the remand centre? So sad that CBC is so misleading.

This is not to say that what happened is excusable or justified, leaving the scene of a crime like this is of course a big no-no, but CBC doesn't really paint an accurate picture about the whole thing, especially omitting to mention that the pedestrian was crossing against the lights, instead opting to vilify someone they feel necessary to point out as an immigrant. This isn't to say that Zhang should have been portrayed as some poor innocent sap that was taken advantage of by the justice system, as this isn't necessarily the case, but CBC certainly could have done a better job here.

This is truly a tragic case of loss and unfortunate circumstance, but we can really do without CBC creating villains for us. Don't you agree? I have no problem with them reporting the news and the facts, but this kind of spin makes me sick.

We can all learn from our mistakes, and perhaps the case of Zhang can point out for us the danger in not obeying the pedestrian traffic controls; a worthy spin on the story, but ... I suppose, not nearly as provocative as the direction that CBC decided to take.

Sub-issues of this story include (perhaps) the shortfall in support for those with a diagnosis of autism (I don't know if this is true or not, but it could be explored), or even that perhaps there are changes necessary in dealing with people who are charged with a hit-and-run for the first time; some kind of follow-up, a more thorough examination as to why they would run to try and prevent future occurrences. These sub-issues, though, deal with the running aspect of this case, not with the fact that someone was killed.

I'm so disappointed with CBC.

Looks Like I'll Miss Taking A Look

... at the new Calgary Courts Centre. It was supposed to open today, but has been postponed until September 4th. Too bad.

Calgary Courts Centre opening re-scheduled to September, an Alberta Information Bulletin

Privacy Props for my Summer Employer

Nice to see this news release from the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta.

NEWS RELEASE
August 14, 2007

Commissioner applauds Privacy Impact Assessment of Alberta Cancer Board

Alberta’s Information and Privacy Commissioner says advancing electronic health records and protecting privacy is not a zero-sum game. Frank Work was responding to a recent advancement in e-health by the Alberta Cancer Board.

The Board has introduced a new reporting tool, developed by Alberta surgeons, which will gradually replace the standard narrative operative report. The Alberta Web Surgical Medical Record (WebSMR) allows surgeons to access the system immediately after a surgery and, using a survey style electronic template, enter an operative note which replaces the need for transcription and provides timely reporting for care purposes. The system collects only the minimum information needed to meet the program’s goals, and individual surgeons only have access to their own patients’ records.

The Information and Privacy Commissioner is pleased that the Alberta Cancer Board completed a comprehensive Privacy Impact Assessment prior to launching the system. “I am very encouraged to see a Privacy Impact Assessment which means the Board is serious about protecting patient privacy. I have been talking about the need for Privacy Impact Assessments for quite some time, and I think other agencies and public bodies can learn from this”, said the Commissioner. “This is the kind of patient benefit we want from electronic information systems. By doing the Privacy Impact Assessment, we believe the Alberta Cancer Board has proven the need for the program and has taken reasonable steps to address privacy and security issues.”

The Privacy Impact Assessment was submitted to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for review, and Work likes the cooperative approach. “We were able to review all of the privacy measures of this new system, check to see whether custodians are using the least amount of health information needed, whether users of the information will gain access on a need to know basis and whether information security is in place. In this case we are satisfied the Board took proper privacy measures”.

We Need to Understand More

... about why people do the things they do.

The Beltline Rapist from here in Calgary is undergoing his dangerous offender hearing right now. I don't want to comment AT ALL on this guy, but it makes me realize how very important psychological research is, not only for prevention, but for rehabilitation and appropriate treatment and sentencing within the criminal justice system.

This reminds me of a news story from back in May of this year.

The University of Lethbridge (which is a leader in criminal etc. psychology) announced a study they were doing (with U of Toronto) which paid ex-convicted pedophiles to participate in a research project that would monitor their reaction to sexual images. They received huge public outcry at the fact that they'd be PAYING these ex-cons to participate in a study.

Paying people to participate in studies is normal practice. I've been paid to participate in a study before. I got $20 for about 10 minutes of my time (and I got to play computer games with another user ... it was a study on transparent GUIs and multi-user processing on one machine). These ex-cons were getting paid $60 for 2 - 3 hours of their time. So ... pretty standard.

Even though some subjects may make us uncomfortable, they're still worthy and necessary research topics. As long as research is conducted in an ethical and customary way, I say bring it on. It's not like you're rewarding these people for being pedophiles, I'm sure the stigma they carry with them everyday is in no way eased by getting $60 for participating in a study that focuses on their illness (is that even the right word? Illness? I'm no psychologist ... Wikipedia says that pedophilia is considered a mental disorder ... hmmmm).

Maybe when I'm rich and famous one day, I'll kick in money for criminal-psychological research.

There's a law class at the U of S called "Law and Psychiatry", which I did not ballot for. Now that I think about it, maybe I'll try for it for next year ... I bet it would be really interesting. Here's the course description from the academic calendar:

Introduction to psychiatric theory; the methodology of psychiatric diagnosis and modern psychiatric treatment; the role of psychiatrists in the legal process. Psychiatry and the criminal process: remand for mental examination, fitness to stand trial, sentencing, automatism, insanity and dangerous offenders. The concept of competency: contractual and testamentary capacity. Civil commitment of the mentally ill: a comparative study. The psychiatrist as expert witness. Selected problems.

AND ... one week and one day ... it's an important day for two reasons. 1. It's my Sister's birthday. 2. I find out which classes I successfully balloted for, so I'll get my class schedule. EXCITING!